Re: Specfile - Upgrade - Check if the old and the new package versions are the same

pgrade. Thanks! On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 5:41 AM Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 30. 03. 23 v 20:38 Simon Pichugin napsal(a): > > When the server package upgrades to the next major version, there are > upgrade instructions that need to be performed > > by the administrator. >

Re: Specfile - Upgrade - Check if the old and the new package versions are the same

Hi folks, Thank you for the answers! On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 1:16 AM Vít Ondruch wrote: > I wonder what the "do something" is, because comparing versions is almost > always the wrong choice IMHO. > When the server package upgrades to the next major version, there are upgrade instructions that

Specfile - Upgrade - Check if the old and the new package versions are the same

Hi folks, I've spent some time experimenting and trying to implement something like this ($subject): During `%preun servers`: export OLD_VERSION="$(rpm -qa openldap | awk -F- '/^openldap/ && split($2,ver,/\./) >= 1 {print ver[1] "." ver[2] "." ver[3]}')" Then, during `%post servers` if

Re: OpenLDAP 2.5 - Fedora Release - Help Needed

On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 5:14 PM Simo Sorce wrote: > On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 16:27 +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > > Hi folks, > > my name is Simon Pichugin and I am a maintainer for OpenLDAP. > > > > Recently, OpenLDAP has released 2.5 version. > > It has quite a

OpenLDAP 2.5 - Fedora Release - Help Needed

Hi folks, my name is Simon Pichugin and I am a maintainer for OpenLDAP. Recently, OpenLDAP has released 2.5 version. It has quite a big amount of changes - https://www.openldap.org/software/release/announce.html And it includes a pretty important "Upgrading from 2.4.x" secti

[389-devel] Please Review: Issue 4623 - RFE - Monitor the current DB locks #4762

Hi team, I've made the requested changes and improved the tests. The tests heavily depend on the environment's performance so I won't put them to the PR CI (it's in tier2 now and it requires to run it with DB_LOCKS_MONITORING_ACK env. variable) Please, review:

[389-devel] Re: failed to build rpms

Hi team, I've updated the contribution docs as I've tried to remove the confusion :) https://github.com/mreynolds389/389wiki/pull/54/files https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/contributing.html https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/development/building.html Hope that helps, Simon On Tue, Feb 23,

[389-devel] Please Review: PR 4514 - Issue 4513 - Fix schema test and lib389 task module

Hi Mark, team, please check the PR for finalization: https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/pull/4514 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] Please review: PRs #4321 and #4320

Hi team, please, check two PRs about cleaning up after the pagure to github migration: https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/pull/4321 https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/pull/4320 For the second PR, you can check how the README.md will look like here:

[389-devel] 389-ds-base repository has migrated to GitHub

Hi team, so the migration to GitHub was successfully completed! 389 Directory Server repo is now available on: https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base The issue tracker is here: https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base/issues Pull-requests are

[389-devel] Re: 389-ds Migration to GitHub - [2020-09-12 - 2020-09-13]

should really not), I apologize for all inconvenience. Sincerely, Simon On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 PM Simon Pichugin wrote: > Thanks! > > So, the final look is ready, please, check: > https://github.com/droideck/389-ds-base > > The migration project that can be used by ot

[389-devel] Re: 389-ds Migration to GitHub - [2020-09-12 - 2020-09-13]

e.io/SSSD/sssd/issue/36#comment-645569 The code: https://github.com/droideck/patogith/blob/master/lib/patogith/pagure.py#L42 So. please, check and we can move on this weekend if everything is good. Sincerely, Simon On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 8:21 PM Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > for t

[389-devel] 389-ds Migration to GitHub - [2020-09-12 - 2020-09-13]

Hi team, for the last couple of weeks, I was working on the migration tool that will allow us to switch 389-ds project to GitHub. It will be done through the weekend 2020-09-12 - 2020-09-13. I was testing it on a custom repo for some time but, please, review the code, if you would like to:

[389-devel] Please review: PR #51075 - Issue 50610 - memory leak in dbscan and changelog encryption

Hi team, please, check my memory leaks fix: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/51075 Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: PRs - 50924, 50922, and 50918

Hi team, Please, review two small and one big PRs I have: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50924 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50922 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50918 Thanks! Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Re: Please review: PR 50843 and PR 50837

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 03:46:49PM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please review these PRs: > > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50837 > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50842 Wrong PR number. The right one - https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pul

[389-devel] Re: Bundle/Vendor process for npm/js

On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:21:35AM +1000, William Brown wrote: > Yep, perfect! So I think that if I add the cargo vendor steps to step 1, and > then make the makefile use the "offline" mode for 2 it should be all good > then? Similar to npm for offline builds. Sure, this should work if I

[389-devel] Re: Bundle/Vendor process for npm/js

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:20:24PM +1000, William Brown wrote: > Hey there, > > I'm looking at adding the steps for offline builds so that we can start to > use rust. I know that you have some steps for preparing the tar for cockpit > builds with npm/js deps. > > How are you doing this? I was

[389-devel] Please review: PRs 50551, 50570, 50573, 50579

Hi team, there are few PRs on review from me. Please, check... https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50551 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50570 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50573 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50579 Thanks, Simon signature.asc

[389-devel] Re: Good feedback

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:21:49PM +1000, William Brown wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Just thought I'd let you know that I received a few pieces of positive > feedback about dsconf recently to my private mail address. Great work to > everyone on the team for all your work to make lib389 and the new

[389-devel] Please review: PR 50549 and PR 50551

Hi team, both of my PRs are ready for review. Please, check it. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50549 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50551 Thanks! Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list --

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 50206 - Account IDM CLI - WIP

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 11:56:43AM +1000, William Brown wrote: > Sure thing, I'll look soon :) Great, thanks! Forgot to put the link: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50549 > > > On 16 Aug 2019, at 11:55, Simon Pichugin wrote: > > > > Hi team, > > I

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 50206 - Account IDM CLI - WIP

Hi team, I have a big chunk of work ready for review. The main part is done and I just need to polish it a bit more and add more tests. In a mean while... William, could you please take a look? The lib389 part for Accounts is much bigger now and has much more to offer. Thanks, Simon

[389-devel] Re: Please review

On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 05:30:24PM +0530, Anuj Borah wrote: >[1]@Simon Pichugin Sure, I'll get to it soon. I just got back from a long PTO. But also, I am not the only team member with review rights :) So I am not sure why you quote me personally... Thanks, Simon > >Plea

[389-devel] Porting Perl scripts

Hi team, I am working on porting our admin Perl scripts to Python CLI. Please, check the list and share your opinion: - cl-dump.pl - dumps and decodes changelog. Is it used often (if at all)?

[389-devel] Re: Issue with building RPMs with ASAN_ON

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 09:20:26AM +0200, William Brown wrote: > > > > On 18 Jun 2019, at 17:45, Viktor Ashirov wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 7:54 AM Viktor Ashirov wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 1:30 AM Simon Pichu

[389-devel] Issue with building RPMs with ASAN_ON

Hi team, I'm in the process of creating a Vagrant file which is close to the customer's ENV. It is heavilly based on Viktor's beaker task. I use it for building and testing my code. And it is pretty important to build with ASAN. Currently, what I do is: 1. Set 'ASAN_ON = 1' in rpm.mk 2. Run

[389-devel] Please review: PR 50440 - Truncate the message when buffer capacity is exceeded

Hi team, please, review my recent PR: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50440 I've added CI test and I've done stress testing to see if performans is affected (the details are inside) Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Re: On the command line tools ....

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 09:50:48AM -0400, Mark Reynolds wrote: > On 5/22/19 9:02 PM, William Brown wrote: > > Hi all, Hi William, > > I would propose to change this - but I feel we are now wedged on change by > > two things: > > > > * Red Hat have documented these tools, and it's a big ask to

[389-devel] Re: Use of rust for new logging backend

On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 01:21:28PM +1000, William Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > So it's been a while since I pushed this, but again, I think I want to bring > this up. I'd like to write the new logging backend in Rust. > > I'll start with a summary: > > Pros: > * Faster development time due to

[389-devel] Re: Please review

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 02:15:55PM +0530, Anuj Borah wrote: >Hi all, Hi Anuj, >Please review these PRs. >Pending from Long Time. >[1]https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50180 >[2]https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/50192 Could you please rebase them onto master?

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49928 - Fix various small WebUI schema issues

Hi team, please, review the WebUI schema change. Also, I wait for this to be merged https://github.com/python-ldap/python-ldap/pull/247 but my PR will work as intended without it, I put a small workaround which we will remove later. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49966

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49928 - WebUI schema functionality and improve CLI part

Hi team, please, review WebUI schema PR: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49928 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49957 Thanks! Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49761 - Fix replication test suite issues

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49846 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49761 Thanks! Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49640 - Cleanup plugin bootstrap logging

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49640 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49822 Thanks! Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49761 - Fix more CI test issues

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49761 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49787 Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49640 - Errors about PBKDF2 password storage plugin at server startup

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49640 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49771 Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49761 - Fix CI test suite issues

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49761 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49762 Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49646 - Improve TLS cert processing in lib389 CLI

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49646 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49709 And the issues were fixed: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49381 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49708 Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49381 - Add docstrings to plugin test suites - Part 1

Hi team, please, review a docstrings commit. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49381 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49708 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49581 - Fix dynamic plugins test suite

Fixed the issues Viktor has reported. Please, review. On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 12:25:35PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:17:06PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > > Hi team, > > please review a PR for dynamic plugins test suite fix. > > > > ht

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49657 - Fix cascading replication scenario in lib389 API

The issues mentioned by Mark were fixed. On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:32:22PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please, review: > > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49659 > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49657 >

[389-devel] Re: lib389 usage cheatsheet

Hi Thierry, I agree with you, it was exactly my proposition :) Keeping main python-ldap elements is important because we don't want to implement or mask/wrap this basic functionality (like working with controls, etc) we just want to redirect them. Ideally, we should make our admin library very

[389-devel] lib389 usage cheatsheet

Hi team, recently, we had a discussion on a scrum meeting about lib389 and its new API. If I understood right there was an opinion that lib389 DSLdapObjects API is not very intuitive and it is much easier stick to python-ldap style because it uses ldapmodify/ldapadd wording (or close enough to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49657 - Fix cascading replication scenario in lib389 API

Hi team, please, review: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49659 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49657 Thanks! Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Ticket 49650 - lib389 enable_tls doesn't work on F28

Hi team, please review: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49650 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49653 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49538 - replace cacertdir_rehash with openssl rehash

I've changed it to c_rehash tool and added a small fix related t remove_ds_instance. On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 04:06:35PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please, review: > > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49538 > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49651 >

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49538 - replace cacertdir_rehash with openssl rehash

Hi team, please, review: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49538 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49651 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49406 - Port backend_test.py test to DSLdapObject implementation

Hi team, please review a test suite with simple tests for Backends(DSLdapObject) implementation. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49406 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49647 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list --

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49642 - lib389 should generate a more complex password

Hi team, https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49643 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49642 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] Please review - Issue 49612 - lib389 remove_ds_instance() does not remove systemd units

Hi team, please, review a lib389 Python installer (remove function) patch. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49641 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49612 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49109 - nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo should accept StartTLS as an option

The LDAP+StartTLS was changed back to StartTLS by Mark suggestions and I support his commentary. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49613#comment-50699 Please, check once again if everything is okay. Thanks! Simon On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:38:51AM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > On

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49511 - memory leak in pwdhash

Hi team, please review a small fix for memory leak issue: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49511 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49638 Thanks! Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49581 - Fix dynamic plugins test suite

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:17:06PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please review a PR for dynamic plugins test suite fix. > > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49581 > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49626 > I devided it in two parts for easy review. >

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49581 - Fix dynamic plugins test suite

Hi team, please review a PR for dynamic plugins test suite fix. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49581 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49626 I devided it in two parts for easy review. https://pagure.io/fork/spichugi/389-ds-base/c/9c7a76e27adfff02c40abdd4d49acfa187b97a14 First part

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49109 - nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo should accept StartTLS as an option

Hi team, as William and Matus proposed, I've changed nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo: TLS to LDAP+StartTLS. Also, I've changed existed TLS test suite so it covers the change. On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:45:52AM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please, review: > > https://pagure.io

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49109 - nsDS5ReplicaTransportInfo should accept StartTLS as an option

Hi team, please, review: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49109 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49613 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Re: Use of int types in the code base,

nt types in the code base, > > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 02:35 -0500, Simon Pichugin wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "William Brown" <will...@blackhats.net.au> > > > To: "Simon Pichugin" <spich...@redhat.com> &g

[389-devel] Re: Use of int types in the code base,

- Original Message - > From: "William Brown" <will...@blackhats.net.au> > To: "Simon Pichugin" <spich...@redhat.com> > Cc: "389-devel" <389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> > Sent: Friday, March 9, 2018 12:30:40 AM > Subject:

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49593 - NDN cache stats should be under the global stats

Fixed issues with inttypes. On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 08:01:33PM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Fixed compile warnings. > > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:53:53PM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > > Hi team, > > please, review: > > > > https://pagure.io/389-ds-

[389-devel] Re: Use of int types in the code base,

Hi William! Thank you for the email. It has clarified the things for me. :) I still have one question though. Do I understand right that I need also to cast types with these types from inttypes.h? So use it not only in the defenitions. - sprintf(buf, "%lu", (long unsigned int)maxsize); +

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49593 - NDN cache stats should be under the global stats

Fixed compile warnings. On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:53:53PM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please, review: > > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49595 > https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49593 > > Thanks, > Simon >

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49593 - NDN cache stats should be under the global stats

Hi team, please, review: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49595 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49593 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49572 - ns_job_wait race on condvar

Hi team, please, review a small fix for nunc-stance tests: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49572 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49592 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49584 - Fix issues with paged_results test suite

Hi team, please, review a small fix: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49584 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49590 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49560 - Add a test case for extract-pemfiles

Hi team, please, review a new pull request: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49578 And a gentle reminder... https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49567 Thanks, Simon ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Add a test suite for ds-replcheck tool RFE

Please, review the full version of the RFE test suite. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49567 - Original Message - > From: "Simon Pichugin" <spich...@redhat.com> > To: "389 Directory server developer discussion." > <389-devel@list

[389-devel] Please review: Add a test suite for ds-replcheck tool RFE

Hi team, please, review a draft of RFE tests https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49567 ___ 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49043 - Add a test suite

Final version. All tests from other tickets were added. Please, review. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49558 - Original Message - > From: "Simon Pichugin" <spich...@redhat.com> > To: "389 Directory server developer discussion." > <389

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 48085 - Add encryption cl5 test suite

Hi team, please, review my rework of Sankar's patch. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/48085 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/f78334baf6bc2eab6b9566f79aa2321b262ac604ff6b1a32dba7bf806376-0001-Issue-48085-Add-encryption-cl5-test-suite.patch Thanks!

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49043 - Add a test suite

Hi team, I'll be on PTO 02.02, I'll check the comments on Monday https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/pull-request/49558 Practicing pull-requests. Also, the test will fail at the tearDown. It will be fixed in https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49551 Thanks!

[389-devel] Please review: Ticket 49523 - Refactor CI test

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49523 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/da1e9819a28050aed3d00828a1b8212f19420411d6fd8e11aabe7a6776f851c3-0001-Ticket-49523-Refactor-CI-test.patch signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 389-devel

[389-devel] Re: PR's might now be an option!

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 10:33:35AM +1000, William Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > We recently have completed two PR based merges, both went successfully. > > I think it's time we bring up again the option of allowing PR's as a > main workflow for the project. > > I think we can allow both PR + patch

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49374 - Add CI test case

Hi team, please review a small test case: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49374 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/f23c2afa41b204756126c621b8a0c12678179048a725e587f775b0a4cfc19200-0001-Issue-49374-Add-CI-test-case.patch Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 47536 - Add Python 3 support and move test case to suites

I've fixed the issues: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/e023d32821b13103e662b94b1348a0a3016b3ea15fd24b4e2bebfefbdae9e8e6-0001-Issue-47536-Add-Python-3-support-and-move-test-case-.patch On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 03:53:17PM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please,

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 47536 - Add Python 3 support and move test case to suites

Hi team, please, review the Python 3 support patch. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/47536 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/1cdbed5b2520a0f85c950305ee3f40e605f8d263129ff70996952ba8ac94d895-0001-Issue-47536-Add-Python-3-support-and-move-test-case-.patch Thanks, Simon

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49408- Add a test case for nsds5ReplicaId checks

Hi team, please, review a small test case I need to verify BZ: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49408 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/f5457f377c15dd5d35d153baa775a8be15f883c419d929fb41a4203be145a200-0001-Issue-49408-Add-a-test-case-for-nsds5ReplicaId-check.patch Thanks, Simon

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue #77 - Refactor docstrings in rST format - part 2

https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/a7f959f31cfd6f5b4f837dd715bf1d0beb96a182e30a0c1b13bfc4d3cdfbc905-0001-Issue-lib389-77-Refactor-docstrings-in-rST-format-pa.patch On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:44:07PM +0100, Simon Pichugin wrote: > A second part: > > https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/7

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue #77 - Refactor docstrings in rST format - part 2

A second part: https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/77 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/b050293a47890b3527564aa336937830b0fc298a90037f972e46d49477134a24-0001-Issue-49381-Refactor-numerous-suite-docstrings-Part-.patch On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 07:33:24PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi t

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 48393 - Add a test case for nsds5ReplicaId checks

https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/48393 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/a900cbac9d8d6ed0bd14a424dd966cca4233a1376fb392c2129d5987d3073f90-0001-Issue-48393-Add-a-test-case-for-nsds5ReplicaId-check.patch signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue lib389 3 - Python 3 support for ACL test suite

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:14:12PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi team, > please, review the Python 3 support patch for ACL. > > Also, please, check it if you are a developer. Because it contains > the indended way to use lib389 feature for Python 3 support. > > https://p

[389-devel] Please review: Issue lib389 3 - Python 3 support for ACL test suite

Hi team, please, review the Python 3 support patch for ACL. Also, please, check it if you are a developer. Because it contains the indended way to use lib389 feature for Python 3 support. https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/3

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49381 - Refactor numerous suite docstrings - Part 2

Fixed the issues: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49381 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/b050293a47890b3527564aa336937830b0fc298a90037f972e46d49477134a24-0001-Issue-49381-Refactor-numerous-suite-docstrings-Part-.patch On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 03:27:36PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 99 - Fix typo in create_topology

Hi team, please review two line patch. https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/99 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/f3e504a5779b08eedf743645be3ab3af601213a5f35e9e44dd7f02254a43f72c-0001-Issue-99-Fix-typo-in-create_topology.patch Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49381 - Refactor numerous suite docstrings

New version: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49381 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/525619ec2b6d51ca4a78998e6b40c43d344e19d180e97ee67f1e09c82721f86f-0001-Issue-49381-Refactor-numerous-suite-docstrings.patch On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 05:42:20PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi t

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 49381 - Refactor numerous suite docstrings

New version: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49381 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/afa9b1a73b02e21633279b939d02deff33328cdc100b4c7c80645dd6b532f7ac-0001-Issue-49381-Refactor-numerous-suite-docstrings.patch On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 05:42:20PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Hi t

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 49381 - Refactor numerous suite docstrings

Hi team, please, review the patch for suite docs. https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49381 https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/raw/files/5e909fe03f497ebad570a73364de1c2145f5c9b99d88c0543628ff5c0f0b038a-0001-Issue-49381-Refactor-numerous-suite-docstrings.patch Thanks, Simon signature.asc

[389-devel] Please review: Issue #77 - Fix changelogdb param issue

Hi team, please, review: https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/77 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/486d6f41143e829fde00c722747e95d4ad03efafd0680b1e78f1c95ec693c3c0-0001-Issue-77-Fix-changelogdb-param-issue.patch Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Please review: Issue #77 - Refactor docstrings in rST format - part 1

Hi team, please, check out the new docs. https://fedorapeople.org/~spichugi/html/index.html https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/77 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/2e181d5321f194587899b1cbb37455d86d2754daeacb2d02c6de60aa9830b079-0001-Issue-77-Refactor-docstrings-in-rST-format-part-1.patch

[389-devel] Please review: Issue #77 - Add sphinx documentation

Hi team, Most of the comments were applied. Thanks! Now the layout is: - index.rst - welcoming word, Table of Contents and Contact Us. - guidelines.rst - is included into index.rst and contains basic test development workflow, pytest features overview, and basic lib389 and python-ldap

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 85 - Remove legacy replication attribute

Hi team, please, review the patch for lib389. I've checked, it fixes tickets/ticket48325_test.py. https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/85 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/d5d0b94c97f8d341f4785e76c94c719d3902b80c3f339f047a9e95316ff28dcd-0001-Issue-85-Remove-legacy-replication-attribute.patch

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 91 - Fix replication m1h1c1 topology

Hi team, https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/91 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/f9874b05dcab8b6e01517163218c9572b14373b8809cf93a1a38827c3db1873f-0001-Issue-91-Fix-replication-m1h1c1-topology.patch Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[389-devel] Issue 83, 79 - lib389 - Fix tests and create_test.py - Replica fix

Hi team, some of the tests in 389-ds-base are broken. The following patches should fix them: For 389-ds-base: https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/83

[389-devel] Issue 83 - lib389 - Replace topology agmt objects

Hi team, please review a patch for 389-ds-base tests: https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/83 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/9d807e6ff14eb4df440feea988db6f94794eba9d40b3204b8ed8286d9fce3dff-0001-Issue-83-lib389-Replace-topology-agmt-objects.patch Thanks, Simon signature.asc Description:

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 79 - Fix replica.py and add tests

, Simon Pichugin wrote: > Add enum34 to requirements.txt for py2 compatibility > > https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/79 > https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/7be353523a4a7ad8382a9a98ad778819f5e7557ab1812b9d1e595499ef821244-0001-Issue-79-Fix-replica.py-and-add-tests.patch > > On

[389-devel] Re: future of lib389 - seperate or merged?

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 04:00:23PM +1000, William Brown wrote: > My vote is to merge them. I came to this decision because I believe that > this will make development against multiple branches easier with regard > to testing and backport of patches. For example, we'll know that lib389 > that's

[389-devel] Please review: issue 77, issue 79, issue 83

Hi team, please, check out the issues. They were updated recently (or just waiting for the review): https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/77 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/6047ac156e06192837271afc2770a83f7f3206400669537bb1d8f43ab7b9a434-Guidelines-for-using-pytest-and-lib389_47541162.html

[389-devel] Please review: Issue 83 - Add an util for generating instance parameters

Hi team, please, review a new patch for big topology refactoring. I'll add a patch for 389-ds-base tests before the pushing it. https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/83

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Draft of the big lib389 and pytest guide

Hi team, a new version: https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/77#comment-451622 https://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/6047ac156e06192837271afc2770a83f7f3206400669537bb1d8f43ab7b9a434-Guidelines-for-using-pytest-and-lib389_47541162.html Thanks, Simon On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 04:31:50PM +0200, Simon

[389-devel] Re: Please review: Issue 79 - Fix replica.py and add tests

ps://pagure.io/lib389/issue/raw/files/80825f0aee3bcb098b89d442af4526df8b13e2082496de83669dc4220199002e-0001-Issue-79-Fix-replica.py-and-add-tests.patch > > Thanks, > Simon > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 03:14:59PM +0200, Simon Pichugin wrote: > > Hi team, > > please

  1   2   >