On (05/09/16 15:35), Petr Cech wrote:
On 09/05/2016 03:32 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (05/09/16 15:24), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 02:31:31PM +0200, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Fabiano Fidêncio
> > > > Petr,
> > > >
> > > > I went through your patches and in general they look good to me.
> > > > However, I haven't done any tests yet with your patches (and
> > > > it after lunch).
> > >
> > > I've done some tests and I've been able to see the ldif changes in
> > > domain log. So, I assume it's working.
> > > For sure it's a good improvement! Would be worth to link some
> > > documentation about ldiff as it may be confusing for someone who is
> > > not used to it.
> > >
> > > I'll wait for a new version of the patches and go through them again.
> > >
> > > I really would like to have someone's else opinion on this series.
> > I quickly scrolled through the patches and the primary thing I don't
> > understand is why are the wrappers used only in sysdb? I think we should
> > just use them everywhere..
> I do not like wrappers.
> We should not log ldif by default.
> I thought they would be used just for development purposes.
> therefore they should not be used anywhere and not everywhere.
please, are you satisfied with those wrappers at really high debug level?
See my other answer.