directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: ADS bug report 2007#1
Date Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:50:34 GMT
Hi,

Thanks for groking this stuff.  Someone has to keep us straight :).

WRT doing 1.0.1 right now I'm overloaded.  Yeah it does not take much to 
overload me :).  Right now my focus is going to be on getting this 
schema and replication stuff done.

Perhaps if enough people want to help out with the bug parade I don't 
mind pushing out the 1.0.1 release.  Are others interested in leading this?

Alex


Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> 2007 Report #1
> ----------------------
> 
> Hi guys ! This is 2007, and it's time for a new ISSUES report. 2006 saw 
> the birth of 1.0.0, and we now have some new bugs as we also have new 
> users. let's look at those nasty bugs we have :)
> 
> Gathered, all opened, In progress and Reopened Bugs, Improvments, New 
> features, Task, Sub-tasks and Wishes are 187 :
> 
> Bugs : 33
> Improvments : 47
> New features : 82
> Sub task : 1
> Tasks : 18
> Wishes : 6
> 
> Let's focus on bugs. Out of those 33 bugs, we have :
> 3 blockers
> 1 critical
> 20 majors
> 8 minors
> 1 trivial
> 
> Here are the blockers :
> DIRSERVER-789 : (1.0.0) Alias names, OIDs an subtypes of requested 
> attributes are ignored
> DIRSERVER-782 : (1.0.0) Restart required after changing password (though 
> I think it should not be considered as a blocker)
> DIRSERVER-778 : (1.5.0) Entries cannot be named when mitosis is enabled.
> 
> The critical :
> DIRSERVER-783: (1.0.0) Adding another value to an attribute results in 
> the value to be added twice
> 
> The majors :
> DIRSERVER-792 : (1.0.0) jpegPhoto attribute is returned as a String by 
> SearchResultEntry
> DIRSERVER-791 : ( 1.0.0) Some issues regarding attribute modification
> DIRSERVER-788 : (1.0.0) Attribute names are being lowercased again 
> instead of being returned AS-IS
> DIRSERVER-787 : (1.0.0) ApacheDS tools should use the daemon classloader 
> infrastructure to include jars in lib/
> DIRSERVER-784 : (1.0.0) The server fails to handle subtree refinement 
> membership references in entries upon object class changes
> DIRSERVER-776 : (1.5.0) entryUUID only created when entries are added 
> with Mitosis enabled
> DIRSERVER-770 : (1.0.0) LDIF file import at startup fails
> DIRSERVER-768 : (1.0.0) provide debug output in 
> org.apache.directory.server.core.authn.AuthenticationService.checkAuthenticated()
> DIRSERVER-766 : (1.0.0) uniqueMember attribute compare does not seem to 
> work properly (uniqueMemberMatch is not implemented?)
> DIRSERVER-759 : (1.0.0) object scope search on non-existant DN gives 
> IllegalArgumentException: "Argument 'an_obj1' is null"
> DIRSERVER-756 : (1.0.0) Problem with escaped comma in DN
> DIRSERVER-755 : ( 1.0.0) Referrals returned as regular entries after 
> server restart
> DIRSERVER-730 : (1.0.0) init script fails due to missing commands 
> "success" and "failure"
> DIRSERVER-682 : (1.0.0) apacheds dump command - hangs very frequently
> DIRSERVER-169 : (1.0.0) Incorrect SearchResult name and "compare" 
> failure using CoreContextFactory
> DIRSERVER-110 : (1.0.0) Allow administrators to change and set passwords 
> for users
> 
> Some comments :
> - DIRSERVER-782 is definitvely not a blocker. I'm not sure that it 
> should not be considered as a Task, instead of a bug
> - DIRSERVER-788 should be investigated. It's not really a bug per se, 
> but this is annoying.
> - DIRSERVER-770 needs to be investigated on a Windows(TM) machine. Anyone ?
> - DIRSERVER-768 is pretty much an improvment, not a bug.
> - DIRSERVER-759 has been tested against 1.5.0, but I'm pretty sure that 
> we have the very same problem with 1.0.0
> - DIRSERVER-682 is it still an issue? It was created against ADS 1.0 RC3 ...
> - DIRSERVER-169 is in the field for almost one year now...
> 
> If I just select the 1.0 relative bugs, and remove the dubious bugs ( 
> 782, 788, 768 and 682), we have 18 major, critical or blocking bugs. Not 
> counting the fixes done since 1.0.0 is out - which are numerous !
> 
> Time for a 1.0.1, no ?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cordialement,
> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
> www.iktek.com <http://www.iktek.com>


Mime
View raw message