Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Additional query attributes option for Member search strategy #68

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 3, 2014

Conversation

mtodd
Copy link
Member

@mtodd mtodd commented Dec 3, 2014

Adds an option for the Member search strategy to include attributes in member queries. This allows us to specify attributes like objectClass in addition to the required member attributes for other purposes (like filtering out groups by objectClass).

cc @jch

mtodd added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2014
Additional query attritbutes option for Member search strategy
@mtodd mtodd merged commit 51f9cfd into master Dec 3, 2014
@mtodd mtodd deleted the member-search-attrs-option branch December 3, 2014 00:39
@michaeltwofish michaeltwofish changed the title Additional query attritbutes option for Member search strategy Additional query attributes option for Member search strategy Dec 3, 2014
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ class Recursive
include Filter

DEFAULT_MAX_DEPTH = 9
ATTRS = %w(member uniqueMember memberUid)
DEFAULT_ATTRS = %w(member uniqueMember memberUid)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This existed before, so I'm not asking for a change, but are these standard LDAP attributes? Or are they attributes we expect when using this strategy?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Both, really. member and uniqueMember are attributes of the groupOfNames and groupOfUniqueNames object classes (and Active Directory's group category), and memberUid is for the posixGroup object class.

Hardcoding these here (and elsewhere) is a smell. Addressing that smell is a fairly large engineering undertaking that isn't possible right now. I have some ideas I'd like to run by you, though, for the future.

@jch
Copy link
Contributor

jch commented Dec 3, 2014

👍 makes sense

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants