directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark van Reijn <mvre...@idfocus.nl>
Subject Re: [Studio] New value editors developed
Date Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:57:04 GMT
Hello Emmanuel,

I can answer your questions right away

> <legal and practical aspects>
> That raises at least two questions though :
> - Who will maintain the code ?
> - Is the code ready for a donation ?
> 
> The second question is fairly easy to deal with : if Mark is the unique
> author of this code, then a donation to Apache can be done easily. There
> is only one thing that needs to be checked : are those extensions
> developped during Mark's day job ? (ie, was he paid to develop those
> extensions ?) In this case, I think we need an agreement from his
> company too. But that is just paperwork...


I am the sole author of this code, and I am co-owner of my company. 
This solves two issues in one go ;-)

> Regarding the code maintenance, this is more a concern. There are 3 use
> cases here :
> - the code is simple, and we can absorb the load
> - the code is complex, or very specific, and requires some deep
> eDirectory knowledge, but Mark can be made a committer easily, assuming
> Mark wants to assume the maintenanc (and why not helping us in other
> peices of the code ;-)
> - Mark just want to donate the code, we have nobody to maintain it.


I would not mind to maintain this code. Attribute syntaxes rarely change, and the eDirectory
/ IdM knowledge is part of my daily work. 
Also, I am thinking about an enhancement to the main code with regards to DN resolving using
F3. That would be easier to research and test as a committer. 

> We would like to see people extending Studio teh way they like, even if
> it's with proprietary extensions (but it's always better if it's Open
> Source, of course !). We should discuss the course of actions in tjis
> very case.


My code may be made open source. However, being able to expose extensions using an update
site (open source or not) does allow small businesses like mine some exposure which would
be a nice benefit. 
Besides, in the short term, people using current or older versions may be able to use (and
test) the extensions already. 

What would be the next step for me to share my code?
Regards,

Mark


Mark van Reijn

I  D  F  o  c  u  s   b.v.
Empowering Identity

E:  mvreijn@idfocus.nl
T:  +31 6 4170 7287
W:  www.idfocus.nl




On 2 dec. 2014, at 12:12, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 02/12/14 09:04, Mark van Reijn a écrit :
>> Hi Stefan,
> 
> Hi Mark, Stefan,
>> 
>> thanks for your reply. 
>> Somehow Studio still has a dialog for the extension location when I choose Help /
Software Updates / Manage Configuration. 
>> I am using 2.0.0.v20130628 which is M8 iirc. 
>> 
>> To answer your question, I have developed editors for
>> * eDirectory 
>> 	* ACLs
>> 	* Path syntax
>> * Identity Manager (=eDirectory underneath)
>> 	* DirXML-Associations
>> 	* DirXML-EntitlementRef
>> 	* DirXML-EntitlementResult
>> 	* password sync results
>> 	* assigned roles
>> 	* assigned resources
>> 	* resource history
> 
> Those are all good extensions, and we would be pleased to add them to
> Studio, making it easier for eDirectory users.
> 
> Let me go a bit deeper into the contribution legal aspects here, just
> for the sake of clarity (don't be scared by the phrasing, I'm just
> spelling out facts, I'm not anticipating any decision or judging here).
> 
> <legal and practical aspects>
> That raises at least two questions though :
> - Who will maintain the code ?
> - Is the code ready for a donation ?
> 
> The second question is fairly easy to deal with : if Mark is the unique
> author of this code, then a donation to Apache can be done easily. There
> is only one thing that needs to be checked : are those extensions
> developped during Mark's day job ? (ie, was he paid to develop those
> extensions ?) In this case, I think we need an agreement from his
> company too. But that is just paperwork...
> 
> Regarding the code maintenance, this is more a concern. There are 3 use
> cases here :
> - the code is simple, and we can absorb the load
> - the code is complex, or very specific, and requires some deep
> eDirectory knowledge, but Mark can be made a committer easily, assuming
> Mark wants to assume the maintenanc (and why not helping us in other
> peices of the code ;-)
> - Mark just want to donate the code, we have nobody to maintain it.
> 
> Obviously, option (3) does not work. We can't accept code that is not
> maintained, and the team is currently fairly small, with day jobs already...
> Option (1) is simple, but brings no guarantee, still if teh code is in
> good shape, it should not be an obstacle.
> Option (2) is a clear winner.
> 
> </legal and practical aspects>
> 
>> As you can see, a lot of stuff is pretty specific to Novell / NetIQ Identity Manager
on top of eDirectory. 
>> The ACLs and Path syntax editors are much needed for eDirectory though. 
>> 
>> I will look into the dropins folder (have not used that yet) but an update site would
be preferable since that is a nice distribution mechanism. 
>> Regards,
> 
> Why not... To see how well it fits with our current architecture, and
> more important, with the rework being done.
> 
> We would like to see people extending Studio teh way they like, even if
> it's with proprietary extensions (but it's always better if it's Open
> Source, of course !). We should discuss the course of actions in tjis
> very case.
> 
> Thanks Mark !
> 


Mime
View raw message