Lukas Slebodnik <lsleb...@redhat.com> writes:

> On (03/05/16 12:29), Robbie Harwood wrote:
>>David Kupka <dku...@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> --8<------------- trac-ticket-template-proposal ------------------->8--
>>> Related SW versions:
>>> On server:
>>> {{{
>>> $ rpm -q freeipa-server pki-base 389-ds-base bind samba krb5-server 
>>
>> I think this is a good idea.  However, we are on Debian/family as
>> well now, and I think we want to accept bugs that come from these
>> users as well.
>
> FreeIPA is heavily patched on debian and has quite old version there
> 4.0.5.
>
> The better would be recommend to reproduce with upstream version
> (fedora/CentOS).

(FreeIPA 4.1.4 is available on Debian, but your point still stands.)

In summary: I don't like that upstream is conflated with fedora/CentOS.
Of course I understand that this was done to ease development and not
out of malice.  But longer term I would like Debian/Ubuntu FreeIPA to be
less of an afterthought because I believe we can attract users to our
product.  I believe this to be especially true with working
freeipa-client on those distros, which we now have and I am very happy
about.

Ultimately, it's not a huge issue.  Users who are able to build from
source very likely also know their package manager and how to translate
the invocations.  And if they're not building from source, then the bug
should go downstream first regardless.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

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

Reply via email to