URL: https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/611 Title: #611: Do not build the local provider by default
pbrezina commented: """ > Thanks, this is a good start. We also want to remove the whole pysss.local > interface and don't build the sss_* tools like sss_useradd and so on. > > If you want to remove the usage of the local provider from tests, does it > make sense to keep the code at all using the is_local_provider functions? > Remember the code is not lost forever, we can always ressurect it from git > history. > > btw I'm not sold either way myself, on one hand the local provider might be > handy for tests, on the other hand I haven't used it in a long time myself. > So I would not be completely mad if it goes away. Definitely drop all the code related to local provider. It makes the code complicated since it is a special case. It is also very easy to forget it. If it will be needed again, we can implement a simple backend for local provider just returning EOK from the dbus handlers. But I have literally never used it for testing ever. In addition, it does not really tests anything today since it never goes to backend and requires special casing in responders. """ See the full comment at https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/611#issuecomment-403879182
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list -- sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-devel-le...@lists.fedorahosted.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org/message/XPVIHOOBNV4Y6EQDB2KKMMNOBBN4UPE3/
