Ticket #1332930 (Feature Requests)

Kirktis kirktis at gmail.com
Fri Aug 11 00:05:56 CEST 2006


I did hesitate to send this, for the sole reason that it proposes additional
requirements; but isn't LDAP designed to do exactly what is wanted here? In
fact, I was under the (perhaps incorrect) impression that someone was
already making progress on an LDAP address book feature. This also has the
additional benefit that it can be made compliant with using LDAP address
books on userland software (ie: Outlook, Thunderbird, etc.).

Unless I miss something, that would provide exactly those features that are
being requested.

On 8/10/06, Thomas Bruederli <roundcube at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Eric Stadtherr wrote:
> > Should rev306 be backed out then? It goes against this concept.
> >
> Well, my explanations haven't been clear enough when I talked to
> Tobias... I'll take care of that, but it definitely goes against my ideas.
>
> I don't see any reason to have lots of fields in the database if we
> choose a format that can be parsed fast and allows us interchange the
> data with other formats for import/export/sync. If searching the
> contacts gets a problem I suggest to create a fulltext index with all
> field values required for search.
>
> Please don't hesitate to post your opinions to the addressbook/database
> design.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.roundcube.net/pipermail/dev/attachments/20060810/494b1dff/attachment.html>


More information about the Dev mailing list