it seems the discussion has been forked to devinfo list for who is interested.
JP Le 2017-04-03 à 09:30, Stefano Zamboni a écrit : > > since I was explicitly requested to discuss this topic outside BZ, I > forward it to devinfo and discussion > > > Bug 2388 was created to add to the core the feature of keeping in sync > dhcp leases and dns entries > > in the (long) bug's discussion some solutions were proposed and, at > the end, Stephane created a contrib (thank you mate), because adding a > feature to the core is harder than digging a tunnel under a mountain > with a tea spoon :-) > > now.. > > the code to solve/offer the requested feature already exists, so the > bug itself should not exist and the code developed by Steph should be > already merged into the core. > > so, my first question is: why this code is not in the base? > > and the second one is: since we moved it to the futurere and SME10 is > in alpha stage (which is exactly the phase were you add and test > features), what are the requested steps to add the code to the base? > > thank you > > S. > > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: [Bug 2388] Parse dhcpd.leases and feed to tinydns > Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 13:18:37 +0000 > From: bugzilla-dae...@contribs.org > To: zamb...@mind-at-work.it > > > > *Comment # 137 <https://bugs.contribs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2388#c137> > on bug 2388 <https://bugs.contribs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2388> from > Jean-Philippe Pialasse <mailto:te...@pialasse.com> * > (In reply to Stefano Zamboni from comment #136 <show_bug.cgi?id=2388#c136>) > > I'm well aware of how things are supposed to work.. > > the "issue" here is > > that we already have a contrib, made by > Steph, which > offers the requested feature.. > > that is not the issue I see. What I see here is the need to have dhcp lease > and > dns to be in sync as base functionality. > > Further more having a contrib is not an issue but a workaround. Thanks to > Stephan to have worked on it. > > > > so, IMO, this bug should be cloned for SME10 and this one (which was > a NFR > for SME9) closed.. > > which mean we loose the follow up existing in this bug, or we need to consult > two bugs to fully understand the situation. That's why we usually move the bug > to the higher version of SME available, so we can fix it with a full. Then > duplicate it to lower version where we want to backport it. > > > > sounds reasonable? > > what would sound reasonable is to keep on discussion on devinfo instead of > diluting this bug. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > You are receiving this mail because: > > * You are on the CC list for the bug. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discussion about project organisation and overall direction > To unsubscribe, e-mail discussion-unsubscr...@lists.contribs.org > Searchable archive at https://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
_______________________________________________ Discussion about project organisation and overall direction To unsubscribe, e-mail discussion-unsubscr...@lists.contribs.org Searchable archive at https://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
