Sorry, I like a common look and feel.
that's a laudable goal by itself
I have been looking at all the available LDAP clients, and they all have their pro's and con's ( java, c, perl, python, web based, k or g). Looking at LDAP itself, I can't explain why we need it since we have so many things like it including Zope (or vice-versa depending on your point of view).
that last sentence does not make any sense. who is "we"? you can make such a statement if "we" is limited to yourself, but that statement definitely is not true if "we" is the zope user community as a whole.
I been working on a comprehesive Linux Administration solution that doesn't jump you around to 12 different interfaces to get you what you need, unfortunately, this proves to be almost impossible. Most people write non-intuitive interfaces (myself included), so I have ended up with a montley crew of utilities that do - what I consider to be, comprehensive Linux administration.
stuff like that is already around AFAIK. there's linuxconf and webmin, for example.
Okay, no more complaining. I need only zope to provide minimal support for LDAP. I guess that might include LDAP protocol, a port (389), and a way to suggest to zope that a directory is really LDAP and that objects are really LDAP objects. And that's it. ( I make it sound easier than it is right? ).
yes, you make it easier than it sounds. the big deal is not just opening a port and creating specialized "ldap directory" objects in zope. the big deal is implementing the protocol to talk to ldap clients. jens