On 11/02/2012 09:40 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Dmitri Pal wrote:
>> On 11/02/2012 12:25 AM, Loris Santamaria wrote:
>>> El jue, 01-11-2012 a las 12:47 -0400, Dmitri Pal escribió:
>>>> On 11/01/2012 11:32 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 09:30 -0430, Loris Santamaria wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> we plan to write a freeIPA configuration plugin for Asterisk,
>>>>>> aiming to
>>>>>> be general and useful enough to be included in Fedora and EPEL,
>>>>>> so we
>>>>>> would like to have your input on some issues before we write any
>>>>> Hi Loris,
>>>>> this is really exciting!
>>>> Several procedural questions to the list:
>>>> 1) The design is on the github, Simo, should we have a proxy page
>>>> on our
>>>> wiki that will point to the github project?
>>>> 2) Do we need to track it in some way via our ticketing system to make
>>>> sure that it is aligned with our release cycle?
>>>> 3) Loris, will it be a completely external effort or you want the code
>>>> to land in the IPA repository or IPA tools/plugins/satellite
>>>> that currently does not exist but we probably should have?
>>>> 4) Loris, in a long run how you foresee this functionality being
>>>> delivered? IPA + EPEL and support from your organization or you
>>>> want it
>>>> completely blend into the project and be supported as a part of the
>>>> IPA over time?
>>> Of course it would be great if this plugin could be distributed as an
>>> optional but official IPA component.
>> IMO it can be eventually. It really depends on your goals.
>>> If you see it possible we will
>>> submit the code for review as soon as it is in a working state, else we
>>> will at least submit it for inclusion in Fedora with a dependency on
>> So you are potentially open to moving the project under the "IPA"
>> optional area that currently does not exists but can be created because
>> this project sets a precedent.
>> Let us work out the details when the code is functional.
>>> You could set some guidelines for projects like this.
>> Yes, but we do not have them yet, so it is a good opportunity to
>> identify what these guidelines should include and start putting together
>> a wiki page to provide a guidance. But this is so far uncharted
>> territory so please bear with us and any help in this area would be
>> I will try to put together a wiki page to cover what we already learned
>> from this thread. I also need to read more about Asterisk before I can
>>> I see that a dhcp
>>> plugin is in the works, maybe both this plugin and the dhcp plugin
>>> should get assigned containers under a generic cn=apps container? Ip
>>> phones and maybe printers should be listed under a cn=devices
>> Yes and no. IMO we need to differentiate the components even optional
>> ones that are or will be developed within IPA project and are completely
>> external and independent components developed independently. We need
>> guidance for both but historically it is hard to plan in advance until
>> someone starts actual work. So may be the guideline should state "figure
>> out what the container name for the data you are going to add will be,
>> here are XYZ constraints to consider".
>> This is exactly what you are doing now.
>>> How one should integrate optional components with the Web UI?
>> Yeah this is a gray area to me to. I would love to see a clear doc on
>> this too.
>> Petr, is this doable?
> We have this guide, which has a UI component:
I did not realize that it covers the UI. Last time I read it I do not
remember see a UI section. So is it up to date and sufficient?
Sr. Engineering Manager for IdM portfolio
Red Hat Inc.
Looking to carve out IT costs?
Freeipa-devel mailing list