[Freeipa-devel] [PATCHES 523-525] replica install: add remote connection check over API

[Jan Cholasta]

On 10.12.2015 15:56, Martin Babinsky wrote:
> On 12/10/2015 09:48 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>> On 9.12.2015 16:38, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>> On 9.12.2015 14:52, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>> On 9.12.2015 10:02, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> the attached patches fix
>>>>> <https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/5497>.
>>>>
>>>> Note that this needs selinux-policy fix to work, so put SELinux into
>>>> permissive mode for testing:
>>>> <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289930>.
>>>
>>> Updated patches attached.
>>
>> I screwed up a change in patch 524 and accidentally included a chunk of
>> code in patch 525 that doesn't belong in it.
>>
>> Updated patches attached.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Patches work as expected and I was not able to find any functional problem.
>
> I have a question about the naming of the oddjob helper script: the one
> related to trusts is named 'com.redhat.idm.trust-fetch-domains', and the
> conncheck runner is named 'org.freeipa.server.conncheck'. I don't want
> to start another bikeshedding conversation but shouldn't we named them
> in a consistent fashion (either rename the first one in separate patch
> or rename the new helper to com.redhat.idm.server.conncheck)?
>
> I understand that as an upstream, we should go with the 'org.freeipa.*'
> convention, but having two helpers with different prefixes makes me sad.

If you look at the larger picture, org.freeipa is the consistent name. 
It makes me sad as well, but mistakes should be corrected. This is 
similar to how we use PEP8 in new code, but do not fix it in old code 
just for the sake of fixing it.

>
> That is a nitpick though, it does not affect the overall functionality
> of the patches so ACK.

Thanks for the review. The current patch 523 breaks the trusts oddjob 
with SELinux in enforcing mode, I will send an update which corrects 
that, until bug 1289930 is fixed.

-- 
Jan Cholasta