directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot ...@marcelot.net>
Subject Re: Why is uid=admin present in ou=system ?
Date Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:13:57 GMT
Hi Kiran,

On 23 oct. 2012, at 12:05, Kiran Ayyagari <kayyagari@apache.org> wrote:

> yeap, like we just discussed, we can certainly do that, the two things
> that immediately come to my mind are
> 
> 1. the impact of such a change in the code

It can be important, I haven't checked yet.

> 2. and the number of existing installations that will break because of
> this change

These are the exact number of existing installations that are going to break when going from
server.xml to config.ldif.
1.5.x and 2.x installation will never be upgradable out of the box.
Since we breaking things, let's be consistent and try to gather all the configuration in a
single location.

Software is about change. We would never go beyond the 1.0 mark if everything was set in stone
forever.

Regards,
Pierre-Arnaud


> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Emmanuel L├ęcharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I will rephrase Pierre-Arnaud's mail (should we remove the pu=system partition).
>> 
>> The main issue is that the uid=admin entry, which is used all over the server to
manage it, is stored in the ou=system partition, when it should probably be stored in the
ou=configuration partition.
>> 
>> The consequences is that we can't modify the password with Studio when the server
has not been started a first time, when Studio already has the plugin to manage the configuration
even if the server is not started.
>> 
>> IMO, the uid=admin entry should be moved to the ou=configuration partition.
>> 
>> thoughts ?
>> 
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Cordialement,
>> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
>> www.iktek.com
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Kiran Ayyagari
> http://keydap.com


Mime
View raw message