[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH] 0087 Warn about DNA plugin configuration when working with local ID ranges

[Alexander Bokovoy]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Martin Kosek wrote:
>On 10/17/2012 12:14 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> On 10/17/2012 12:10 PM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:59:53PM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>>>> >On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:51:11AM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>Warn about manual DNA plugin configuration when working with local
>>>>> ID ranges
>>>>> >>since we currently do not support automatic pick up of the changed
>>>>> >>settings for local ID ranges by the DNA plugin.
>>>>> >>https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/3116
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>--
>>>>> >>/ Alexander Bokovoy
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> """)
>>>>> >
>>>>> >I wonder if we should add a sentence like "See section 'Managing Unique
>>>>> >UID and GID Number Assignments' in the FreeIPA Documentation for
>>>>> >details' to point the admin to the right directory? Or replace the last
>>>>> >sentence with something more explicit like 'The dnaNextRange attribute
>>>>> >of 'cn=Posix IDs,cn=Distributed Numeric Assignment
>>>>> >Plugin,cn=plugins,cn=config' has to be modified to match the new
>>>>> range'?
>>>>> Updated the patch, also adding the same warning to the 'idrange-add'
>>>>> help.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> / Alexander Bokovoy
>>>>
>>>> ACK.
>>>>
>>>> If there is an easy way to avoid the duplication it would be nice if you
>>>> can modify the patch accordingly.
>>> Docstring is a string literal only:
>>>     >>> s="""text
>>>     ... first
>>>     ... second"""
>>>     >>> def f():
>>>     ...   """another text
>>>     ...      first
>>>     ...      second"""+s
>>>     ...   return
>>>     ...    >>> print f.__doc__
>>>     None
>>>     >>> def y():
>>>     ...   """Doctstring for y()"""
>>>     ...   return
>>>     ...
>>>     >>> print y.__doc__
>>>     Doctstring for y()
>>>     >>>
>>>
>>> Though we could play the game and do explicit     f.__doc__ = s
>>> this would work but...
>>>
>>> Any preference from others?.
>>
>> In the code you changed, we already play that game.
>>
>
>Ok, it seems I pushed the patch way too early. If Alexander wants to, he can
>prepare a patch to fix the duplication and we I can push the change then.
See my another email. We have more fundamental issues that prevent this
kind of message reuse. You pushed the right patch, I believe.

-- 
/ Alexander Bokovoy