Learn more about these different git repos.
Other Git URLs
As the functionality provided by different SSSD back ends grows gradually, so does the list of the required packages and libraries grow. I think we have reached the point where it makes sense to package different providers as independent subpackages. This split might be beneficial for a number of third parties.
Tools such as realmd that configure the SSSD and are able to install required dependencies on the fly or based on provided options using PackageKit. A typical use case might be user that configures the SSSD to only act as a client for pure LDAP server -- that user would not be interested in installing all the dependencies required by the IPA back end (libipa_hbac, bind-utils) or even the new AD back end which might soon depend on Samba MS-RPC libraries.
Security auditors might (and do) try to find a minimal package set required to get the SSSD working. Providing them with a leaner set of dependencies would help their job.
milestone: NEEDS_TRIAGE => SSSD 1.9.1
priority: major => critical
rhbz: => 0
type: defect => task
owner: somebody => jhrozek
status: new => assigned
milestone: SSSD 1.9.1 => SSSD 1.9.2
patch: 0 => 1
We want this change in upstream and Fedora, but not RHEL-6.4.
Bumping out of 1.9.2 to avoid confusion even though there is a patch.
milestone: SSSD 1.9.2 => SSSD 1.9.3
Not critical for 1.9.3
design_review: => 0
milestone: SSSD 1.9.3 => SSSD 1.9.4
Not going to make 1.9.4
milestone: SSSD 1.9.4 => SSSD 1.9.5
This is a dependency of the sites lookup and the AD support in general. We need to have the AD provider in a separate subpackage to avoid pulling in Samba by default.
milestone: SSSD 1.9.5 => SSSD 1.10.0
milestone: SSSD 1.10.0 => SSSD 1.10 beta
resolution: => fixed
review: => 0
status: assigned => closed
Metadata Update from @jhrozek:
- Issue assigned to jhrozek
- Issue set to the milestone: SSSD 1.10 beta
to comment on this ticket.