[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH] 891 drop has_upg() check

[Rob Crittenden]

Martin Kosek wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 15:09 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>> Rob Crittenden wrote:
>>> Martin Kosek wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 11:01 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>>>>> Martin Kosek wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 23:54 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>>>>>>> The has_upg() check was created during a transition period for 389-ds.
>>>>>>> It is no longer needed and is actually breaking things. The
>>>>>>> location of
>>>>>>> UPG template moved so it thinks the feature is not available. This is
>>>>>>> making the primary user's group ipausers instead of the UPG.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> rob
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Shouldn't we remove has_managed_entries() and its use too? After
>>>>>> all, we
>>>>>> claim that this patch fixes #1242 which asks for has_managed_entries()
>>>>>> removal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Updated patch attached. It removes has_managed_entries().
>>>>>
>>>>> rob
>>>>
>>>> Looks good - there is just some leftover in the bottom of commit
>>>> message, probably from patch squashing.
>>>>
>>>> However, I was thinking about has_upg() removal. Shouldn't we check if
>>>> the UPG plugin is enabled (the same way we do in ipa-managed-entries)?
>>>> Otherwise if the plugin is disabled and we would run user-add command
>>>> without --noprivate option, we would set nonexistent GID for the user as
>>>> the UPG wouldn't be created.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, good point.
>>>
>>> I decided to just fix has_upg() for now.
>>>
>>> I'm caching the value so we don't have to do an extra search every
>>> single time we add a user. I don't think this is the kind of thing that
>>> is going to be turned on/off a lot (e.g. you'll turn it off and be done
>>> with it).
>>>
>>> rob
>>
>> Updated patch to remove caching. Since the config is now replicated if
>> an admin disables it they would quickly have to restart all Apache
>> servers on all replicas which is bad.
>>
>> rob
>>
>
> ipaserver/plugins/ldap2.py:723: [E0001] invalid syntax
>
> return = False? Really? :-)
>
> Martin
>

I'm feeling very philosophical right now. To return or not return...

rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: freeipa-rcrit-891-5-upg.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2407 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20111013/3d78d8c5/attachment.bin>