[Freeipa-devel] Update: Re: Fedora 20 Release

[Rich Megginson]

On 12/17/2013 11:19 AM, Mark Reynolds wrote:
>
> On 12/17/2013 11:35 AM, Rich Megginson wrote:
>> On 12/16/2013 08:07 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>> Hello list,
>>>
>>> we have to decide what we will do with 389-ds-base package in Fedora 
>>> 20.
>>>
>>> Currently, we know about following problems:
>>>
>>> Schema problems:
>>>    https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47631 (regression)
>>
>> Fixed.
>>
>>>
>>> Referential Integrity:
>>>    https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47621 (new functionality)
>>>    https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47624 (regression)
>> Fixed.
>>>
>>> Replication:
>>>    https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47632 (?)
>>
>> Cannot reproduce.  Closed as WORKSFORME.
>>
>>>
>>> Stability:
>>>    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1041732
>> Fixed.
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47629 (we are not sure if the 
>>> syncrepl really plays some role or not)
>>
>> We are still trying to determine the cause, and if this is related to 
>> the use of syncrepl.  If it turns out to be related to syncrepl, I 
>> would like to release 1.3.2.9 in F20, and just disable the use of 
>> syncrepl in 389 clients.
>>
>> Is everyone ok with this?
>>
> Rich I found a crash in 1.3.2 and 1.3.1.  This should go into 
> 1.3.2.9(or a 1.3.2.10).

Ok.

>>>
>>> One option is to fix 1.3.2.x as quickly as possible.
>>>
>>> Another option is to build 1.3.1.x for F20 with Epoch == 1 and 
>>> release it as quickly as possible.
>>>
>>> The problem with downgrade to 1.3.1.x is that it requires manual 
>>> change in dse.ldif file. You have to disable 'content 
>>> synchronization' (syncrepl) and 'whoami' plugins which are not in 
>>> 1.3.1.x packages but were added and enabled by 1.3.2.x packages.
>>>
>>> In our tests, the downgraded DS server starts and works after manual 
>>> dse.ldif correction (but be careful - we didn't test replication).
>>>
>>> Here is the main problem:
>>> 389-ds-base 1.3.2.8 is baked to Fedora 20 ISO images and there is 
>>> not way how to replace it there. It means that somebody can do 
>>> F19->F20 upgrade from ISO and *then* upgrade from repos will break 
>>> his DS configuration (because of new plugins...).
>>>
>>> Simo thinks that this is a reason why 'downgrade package' with 
>>> 1.3.1.x inevitably needs automated script which will purge two 
>>> missing plugins from dse.ldif.
>>>
>>> Nathan, is it manageable before Christmas? One or either way? Is you 
>>> think that the downgrade is safe from data format perspective? (I 
>>> mean DB format upgrades etc.?)
>>>
>>
>