On 06/02/2015 08:34 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 12:04 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>> Dne 2.6.2015 v 02:02 Endi Sukma Dewata napsal(a):
>>> On 5/28/2015 12:46 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>> On a related note, since KRA is optional, can we move the vaults
>>>>> container to cn=kra,cn=vaults? This is the convetion used by the other
>>>>> optional components (DNS and recently CA).
>>>> I mean cn=vaults,cn=kra of course.
>>> If you are talking about the o=kra,<PKI suffix>, I'm not sure whether
>>> the IPA framework will work with it.
>>> If you are talking about adding a new cn=kra,<IPA suffix> entry on top
>>> of cn=vaults, what is the purpose of this entry? Is the entry going to
>>> be created/deleted automatically when the KRA is installed/removed? Is
>>> it going to be used for something else other than vaults?
>> I'm talking about cn=kra,<IPA suffix>. It should be created only when 
>> KRA is installed, although I think this can be done later after the 
>> release, moving vaults to cn=kra should be good enough for now. It's 
>> going to be used for everything KRA-specific.
>>> There are a lot of questions that need to be answered before we can make
>>> this change.
>> This is about sticking to a convention, which everyone should do, and 
>> everyone except KRA already does.
>> I'm sorry I didn't realize this earlier, but the change must be done now.
>>> We probably should revisit this issue after the core vault
>>> functionality is added.
>> We can't revisit it later because after release we are stuck with 
>> whatever is there forever.
>> See attachment for a patch which implements the change.
> Shouldn't we s/kra/vault/ ?
> After all the feature is called Vault, not KRA.

I thought we are naming it by the name of the optional subsystem, not the
feature itself. If for example, another feature from KRA is used, it would
still live in cn=kra, no?

Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code

Reply via email to