[MGNLLDAP-26] Review config / attribute names / property names Created: 24/Jan/08  Updated: 24/Jul/17  Resolved: 04/Nov/15

Status: Closed
Project: LDAP Connector
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Improvement Priority: Major
Reporter: Magnolia International Assignee: Sameer Charles
Resolution: Won't Do Votes: 0
Labels: maintenance
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Template:
Acceptance criteria:
Empty
Task DoD:
[ ]* Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]* Downstream builds green?
[ ]* Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]* Tests
[ ]* FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ]  Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
Date of First Response:

 Description   

A couple of the configuration property names (esp. attributes mappings) are confusing: some are unused; others are used to map their value to the Magnolia User class: in this case they should probably have a name that's meaningful to Magnolia, instead of the not-so-standard ldap naming schemes: GivenName could be "fullname" for instance.
Ideally we should change this but still allow the old ones to be used..



 Comments   
Comment by Michael Mühlebach [ 04/Nov/15 ]

Given the thousands of other issues we have open that are more highly requested, we won't be able to address this issue in the foreseeable future. Instead we will focus on issues with a higher impact, and more votes.
Thanks for taking the time to raise this issue. As you are no doubt aware this issue has been on our backlog for some time now with very little movement.
I'm going to close this to set expectations so the issue doesn't stay open for years with few updates. If the issue is still relevant please feel free to reopen it or create a new issue.

Generated at Mon Feb 12 02:20:51 CET 2024 using Jira 9.4.2#940002-sha1:46d1a51de284217efdcb32434eab47a99af2938b.