[Freeipa-devel] Improving bug reporting

[Lukas Slebodnik]

On (03/05/16 18:48), Robbie Harwood wrote:
>Lukas Slebodnik <lslebodn at redhat.com> writes:
>
>> On (03/05/16 12:29), Robbie Harwood wrote:
>>>David Kupka <dkupka at redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> --8<------------- trac-ticket-template-proposal ------------------->8--
>>>> Related SW versions:
>>>> On server:
>>>> {{{
>>>> $ rpm -q freeipa-server pki-base 389-ds-base bind samba krb5-server 
>>>
>>> I think this is a good idea.  However, we are on Debian/family as
>>> well now, and I think we want to accept bugs that come from these
>>> users as well.
>>
>> FreeIPA is heavily patched on debian and has quite old version there
>> 4.0.5.
>>
>> The better would be recommend to reproduce with upstream version
>> (fedora/CentOS).
>
>(FreeIPA 4.1.4 is available on Debian, but your point still stands.)
>
4.1.4 is only in experimental.
and sid(ustable) has only 4.0.5

Neither of these versions has long term support from upstream point of view.
And try to look into patches
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-freeipa/freeipa.git/tree/debian/patches

>In summary: I don't like that upstream is conflated with fedora/CentOS.
>Of course I understand that this was done to ease development and not
>out of malice.  But longer term I would like Debian/Ubuntu FreeIPA to be
>less of an afterthought because I believe we can attract users to our
>product.  I believe this to be especially true with working
>freeipa-client on those distros, which we now have and I am very happy
>about.
>
If freeipa get to the state that there will not be any non-upstream
patches in distibutions then we will not consider Fedora as upstream.
It might easily happen that non-upstream patch caused a bug.

BTW sssd is already in such state. Therefore we needn't care
about distribution; we just need to know the version of sssd.

Fell free to send patches if you want to have debian as 1st class citizen for
freeipa-server.

LS