On 12/18/2013 09:16 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 17.12.2013 14:54, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:36 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
ipalib/plugins/otptoken.py:230: [E0602(undefined-variable),
otptoken_add.pre_callback] Undefined variable 'owner')
ipalib/plugins/otptoken.py:232: [E
On 17.12.2013 14:54, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:36 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
ipalib/plugins/otptoken.py:230: [E0602(undefined-variable),
otptoken_add.pre_callback] Undefined variable 'owner')
ipalib/plugins/otptoken.py:232: [E0602(undefined-variable),
otptoken_add.pre_ca
On Tue, 2013-12-17 at 09:36 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 16.12.2013 18:01, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 17:31 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> >> Please rename _normalize_owner to _convert_owner and vice versa, to
> >> match the convention used in other plugins (sorry for noti
On 16.12.2013 18:01, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 17:31 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Please rename _normalize_owner to _convert_owner and vice versa, to
match the convention used in other plugins (sorry for noticing this
earlier).
Fixed.
This bit in otptoken_add should be re
On Mon, 2013-12-16 at 17:31 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 13.12.2013 21:15, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 14:50 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 13:24 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> >>> +# Resolve the user's dn
> >>> +owner = entry_at
On 13.12.2013 21:15, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 14:50 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 13:24 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
+# Resolve the user's dn
+owner = entry_attrs.get('ipatokenowner', None)
+if owner is not None:
+
On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 14:50 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 13:24 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> > On 14.11.2013 20:23, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 08:57 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> > >> On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > >>> On Tue,
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 13:24 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 14.11.2013 20:23, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 08:57 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> >> On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>
> +class Bas
On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 13:31 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 12/11/2013 01:24 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> > On 14.11.2013 20:23, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 08:57 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> >>> On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19
On 12/11/2013 01:24 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 14.11.2013 20:23, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 08:57 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
+class Base32DecodeError(ExecutionError):
Is
On 14.11.2013 20:23, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 08:57 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
+class Base32DecodeError(ExecutionError):
Is this really necessary? Are we going to add D
On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 10:18 -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Petr Vobornik wrote:
> > On 10/04/2013 10:16 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >> This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
> >> believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
> >> patch 001
On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 08:57 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> >>
> >> +class Base32DecodeError(ExecutionError):
> >>
> >> Is this really necessary? Are we going to add DecodeError for
> >> every ki
On 8.10.2013 16:35, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
+class Base32DecodeError(ExecutionError):
Is this really necessary? Are we going to add DecodeError for
every kind of new encoding in IPA? Can't we just have generic
DecodeError? (This is not a
On 10/29/2013 10:18 AM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> Petr Vobornik wrote:
>> On 10/04/2013 10:16 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>>> This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
>>> believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
>>> patch 0017, unless other
Petr Vobornik wrote:
On 10/04/2013 10:16 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
patch 0017, unless otherwise noted:
1. I'm not actually sure what the format of the
On 10/04/2013 10:16 PM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
patch 0017, unless otherwise noted:
1. I'm not actually sure what the format of the date parameters is.
C
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 09:19 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 7.10.2013 23:34, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 16:16 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> >> This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
> >> believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues
On 7.10.2013 23:34, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 16:16 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
patch 0017, unless otherwise noted:
1. I'm not
On Fri, 2013-10-04 at 16:16 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
> believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
> patch 0017, unless otherwise noted:
>
> 1. I'm not actually sure what the format of the da
This patch supersedes my patch 0017 and requires patches 0020-0023. I
believe I have solved all of the outstanding issues from the review of
patch 0017, unless otherwise noted:
1. I'm not actually sure what the format of the date parameters is.
Could someone clarify this for me? Should I do someth
21 matches
Mail list logo
