Re: cipux in NEW queue
* Steffen Jöris <Steffen.Joeris@skolelinux.de> [070403 13:23]:
> Hi fellowers
>
> The cipux packages were uploaded to the NEW queue[0] 3 days ago.
> After the ftp-team examined the package, we decided to move the discussion
> about its inclusion or rejection to the public developer list.
> I set the reply-to to debian-edu@lists.debian.org, please keep it on that
> list.
>
>
> The current point which needs to be discussed is the use of the
> cipux-rpc.postinst script. This script calls various cipux commands (or a
> cipux command which calls another cipux command ...) which in the end fills
> in LDAP data. Note that I did not completely examine the script, so somebody
> else might want to give an explanation here. My personal understanding is, to
> put it into a nutshell, that cipux needs to fill in the LDAP data with own
> attributes in order to function. I would consider this as a violation of the
> debian policy, because it adds (without noticing) ldap data which no admin
> would expect while installing it and it gets not removed during a purge.
Not ldap date but it builds up a ldap tree. Regard CipUX with its
functions more as a replace for webmin as a replace for wlus.
AFAIK DebianEdu configures his own LDAP tree since we are using
Openldap.
Did you test that it gets not removed during a purge?
> The question here would be, if this is really a violation, if so how can it be
> avoided or in a drastical case, do we want to ignore it and consider it a
> special case, which is possible through our policy[1], but strongly not
> recommended and should only be a temporary solution.
To build up a ldap tree has to be, anyway which one. Without you
are not able to use ldap.
So in my view it is not a violation of our policy.
> My question now is concerning debian-edu, is it really necessary to change the
> LDAP data and if so why?
Yes, because our users need it. We will fullfill the needs of or
users.
You might discuss if we use another database to store the data.
But i think its the best to use only one.
> Is there any backwards compatibility with the old LDAP data, e.g. will the old
> users show up or can an admin just insert an old ldap backup and everything
> works?
Would be nice to have.
> Do we care about backwards compatibility or how do we want to offer
> Debian-Edu/Skolelinux 3.0 and keep the admin effort to a minimum while
> upgrading to the new version?
Yes we care, if the manpower is enough to do it.
> Another question I would like to add is if cipux will work with other
> adminstration systems.
What do you mean? Other ldap trees? lwat? webmin? wlus? ghosa?
> In the debian-edu repository there is lwat and i am
> not quite sure what debian offers.
It is perhaps a little late to ask this queation? I have checked
other alternatives and i did not found, what our users need. So i
believe, CipUX is the choice.
We have CipUX here in german schools running because the admins asked for
the functionalities. CipUx is running in french schools because
of the users needs ...
> I am bringing this specific question up,
> just out of interest, please note that it is not the intention of the
> ftp-team at this stage to make a decision about which administration tool we
> want to use or if we want to decide in favour of one.
I do not think, that the ftp-team should decide this.
> Please note that our intention is not to start any flamewar, but to start a
> technical discussion to find out which way we want to go and which way suits
> us best.
We start this debate in Erkelenz one year ago ;-)
> Thanks for your attention.
I hope to get more support from DDs and NMs to debianize the complete CipUX.
<debianize> To take a source package and make the necessary modifications
to allow it to be built as a policy compliant Debian package.
> Cheers
> Steffen
>
> [0]: http://ftp.skolelinux.org/skolelinux/new.html
>
> [1]: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/ArchivePolicy
Regards/AmicaLinuxement/Saludos/Viele Gruesse!
Kurt Gramlich
--
kurt@skolelinux.de
GnuPG Key ID 0xE263FCD4
http://www.skolelinux.de
Reply to: