[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ldap: ou=group versus ou=groups

Hi list,

On 02/15/2011 07:31 PM, Andreas B. Mundt wrote:
> I think the best way to do the migration is completely independent of
> all changes I proposed: 

Should we start a different thread for this?

> * Prepare a list (csv) of all user for every category you use:
>   students, teachers, etc.  

Yes? At some schools the default database are indeed an external
one. There this might be possible.

However, for universities or large companies - where the users
seldom change and large changes can be seen in LDAP, I always used
the LDAP database as authoritative choice.

Are you really suggesting to build a CSV file from a LDAP server to
re-import that? Which LDAP attributes should be considered for the
CVS file?

Or could you say more about this situation?

> * Prepare a (GOsa-) template for each category. 

Could you elaborate more on this?

> * Mass-create all users from the lists. For each category use the
>   corresponding template.  
> Well, where do you draw the line? It is now the chance to make these

The line is: Is there a _technical_ reason?

> changes (and in my opinion without extra minutes for the 's'). This
> chance will not come again soon (hopefully). The missing 's' will be
> missing "forever". If every second school in the world uses debian-edu
> ;-) it will be too late, but the missing 's' will be still annoying
> (at least to some). 

And yes all those small 's' do steal you time. Trust me. I worked
years in that field ...

> But I think (and made the experience when working on debian-edu), that
> after quite some years since the beginning of skolelinux,  here and
> there cruft has built up. It's time to refurbish some things. This may
> cause a bit more work for now (not the 's'), but will in the end
> lead to a more attractive and better maintainable system. And this is
> true for maintainers, developers as well as for our users in the
> schools.      

I am in favor of progress. The 's' is just cosmetic - not progress.
So if we need Kerberos (I am not convinced) then I vote for it! But
if you ask about groups or group, I vote for: do not change it.


Reply to: