On 05/04/2018 01:52 AM, Fraser Tweedale via FreeIPA-devel wrote: > Thanks Rob, > > Comments inline. > > On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:59:02PM -0400, Rob Crittenden via FreeIPA-devel > wrote: >> There are a lot of old, outdated PRs. >> >> I think we need to close them and strive hard to keep the list of PRs very >> low so for this round, against my usual instincts, I propose we act on the >> harsher side. Note that I did __not__ review the patches in detail, I'm >> mostly look at at last touch and relevance. >> >> If we don't close them outright then some pushing on the contributor will be >> needed including a timeframe to respond. >> > If we want to close, then close. But for the PRs waiting on > info/updates, invite the contributor to reopen if they provide the > info/updates needed to progress the PR. > >> I think that for any closed PRs we attach a copy of the patches to the >> associated ticket (and mention the remote branch) so we don't lose anything. >> > +1 > >> Here is my list of PRs to close and the reasoning: >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1793 - needs rebase (2 weeks), >> failing test needs investigation. >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1559 appears to be a duplicate of >> this. >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1809 - Needs response to reviewers, >> including, and most importantly, showing that the test succeeds by a >> temporary patch to execute it. >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1724 - There is confusion over what >> branch this needs to land in. >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1650 - Doesn't seem to have >> agreement that this is needed >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1563 - Was a good, >> forwarding-looking change but given William's departure are we likely to see >> this fixed anytime soon? >> > What is the long-term outlook for the old 389 deployment scripts? > If they're planning to remove them the future, it would make sense > for someone to finish this work and land it in master. They will remove the scripts, they were originally supposed to be removed in DS 1.4 AFAIU. The work is done. There was one issue on the DS side (https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49612) and that one's supposedly fixed. I don't think they released a build with it yet, though. > >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1515 - been waiting weeks for >> contributor to address comments of reviewer >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1460 - been waiting months for >> contributor to address comments of reviewers >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1430 - been waiting weeks for >> reviewer comments to be addressed >> > Based on content of (stalled) discussion, I agree to close. > >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1421 - still waiting on contributor >> to update >> > We want this. I think it devolved to a doc/label change to clarify > the actual behaviour, so it should be easy/trivial for any developer > to rework. > >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1378 - been waiting months for >> contributor to address comments of reviewers >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1353 - WIP patch. Is it still needed? >> > I think we want this. Christian needs to comment on the status. > >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/1188 - been waiting months for >> rebase >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/920 - reviewer restarted work a >> month ago, do we want to keep this open? >> >> What to do with the 2 postponed PRs? Will we ever get to them? >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/717 - I don't think we will ever >> finish this >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/433 - same as above >> > I agree to close these. We may revisit in the future, but if we do > we rework it to be not NSS-based (python-cryptography more likely). > >> And then there are these two which are planned changes that have been lost >> to the depths of time: >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/117 - What is the priority of this? >> It is in the 4.7 milestone. >> >> https://github.com/freeipa/freeipa/pull/23 - What to do with this, it was >> planned for 4.5? Does it need coordination with SSSD to do the time >> enforcement? I also did the SSSD part of the work back then, so no, it doesn't. It only needs an agreement of FreeIPA developers of how to do it properly. The PR was opened back then not to lose my work should I leave FreeIPA.
-- Standa Láznička A Red Hat person PGP: 8B00 620A 713B 714E B4CB 4767 C98C 4149 36B1 A7F3
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ FreeIPA-devel mailing list -- freeipa-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to freeipa-devel-le...@lists.fedorahosted.org
