On 08/29/2013 12:22 PM, Tomas Babej wrote: > On 08/29/2013 11:55 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote: >> On 08/28/2013 12:20 PM, Tomas Babej wrote: >>> On 08/28/2013 12:03 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote: >>>> On 08/28/2013 11:46 AM, Tomas Babej wrote: >>>>> On 08/26/2013 10:14 AM, Tomas Babej wrote: >>>>>> On Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:12:09 AM CEST, Petr Vobornik wrote: >>>>>>> On 08/26/2013 09:54 AM, Tomas Babej wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I cooked up a patch for comps that adds a FreeIPA package group. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please chime in if you're OK with package selection / description. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For illustration, see the attached image. FreeIPA will be added as an >>>>>>>> add-on in an installer under the Infrastructure server environment, >>>>>>>> that means, in the included images it will be at the same level >>>>>>>> as DNS or FTP server. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It will also appear in the Software Selection tool (PackageKit). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It should also be available under as yum groupinstall "FreeIPA >>>>>>>> server", >>>>>>>> and in PackageKit, as I understand comps is also source for that too. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_use_and_edit_comps.xml_for_package_groups >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/3630 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO the Audit part in the description is false advertisement. Same >>>>>>> issue is in package descriptions. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know, it's taken directly from there. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd rather have it consistent, if we're going to change it here, we >>>>>> should do >>>>>> there too, so that we do not end up with multiple (seemingly >>>>>> incomplete) >>>>>> descriptions at various places. >>>>> >>>>> Anybody else does have any other concerns? We need to move with this >>>>> effort since string freeze for F20 is coming. >>>>> >>>>> I'm particulary dubious about including the freeipa-tests package. >>>> >>>> I don't think that should be included, developer tests are unnecessary >>>> for a server. >>>> >>> It was marked as optional in the initial proposal, but I agree it's >>> unnecessary for >>> it to be there at all. >>>>> We discussed the A (as Audit) part in the description with Rob. The >>>>> fact is >>>>> that this is taken from the freeipa-server package description and >>>>> nobody >>>>> complained in 7 years. >>>> >>> >>> Updated tests attached. >>> >> >> Oh, one more thing I remembered just now -- is it too late? >> We should include bind-dyndb-ldap (which pulls in bind). Preferably as >> default. >> > > I included it there. > > If anyone else wants to chime in, please do now, I'll create a ticket with > rel-eng at the end of the day. >
Thanks for this effort. What is the status of the bug - did you create the request already? We will need to do one more change and remove freeipa-server-strict package as up on the decision on today's developer meeting we decided to drop this subpackage in Fedora 20 and later and depend on our new FreeIPA Continuous Integration system instead. Martin _______________________________________________ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel
