On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Martin Basti wrote:
On 25/02/15 15:37, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:IMO, we should care only about IPA configured plugins, we cant handle everything, what users added there.On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Martin Basti wrote:Modifications: * All plugins are migrated into new configuration style.* I left attribute uniqueness plugin disabled, cn=uid uniqueness,cn=plugins,cn=config is checking the same attribute. * POST_UPDATE plugin for uid removed, I moved it to update file. Is it okay Alexander? I haven't found reason why we need to do it in update plugin.So I looked up the original thread and since there are three different ways of defining uniqueness plugin's configuration, update plugin was to me the only way to handle all different configuration types. In general we cannot rely on the fact that FreeIPA deployment only contains FreeIPA-defined plugin configurations.If user adds an own plugin configuration there, the one should keep responsibility to test, if the plugin configuration still works after the IPA upgrade.We can't keep what user want, and what IPA needs in all cases, we would break IPA or users expectations, or both.In this case we can add detection of conflicts and print errors during upgrade, but we cant fix plugins which user created. If we want to handle user custom configuration, we will need to add detection for lot of things during upgrade not just uid uniqueness plugin.
Uhm, right. Where my brain was today? :) -- / Alexander Bokovoy
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipaemail@example.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel