On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 14:30 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > > 123: Nack
> > > I don't see the point of this patch (and I think it's
guaranteeing
> > > duplicates). Unless I completely misread Patch 121, you've
already got
> > > the memberOf plugin creating memberUID attributes for ghost
users. So
> > > with this patch, we're adding all memberUID values as group
members,
> > > and then going and adding the ghost users a second time. That
doesn't
> > > make any sense. Please tell me if I've misinterpreted something
here.
> >
> > Actually no, there are no duplicates. I tried to explain in the
commit
> > message. The object that contains users in the ghost attribute
doesn't
> > contain them in memberuid attribute. I didn't want to have
redundant
> > information in the object. That's why we need to look for both
> > attributes.
>
> I saw a discussion yesterday on #sssd that suggested combining the
ghost
> attribute with memberuid, but it wasn't quite clear to me from the
back
> log what the outcome was.
>
> That said, this code looks good to me should we proceed with the
> approach. Just please change the old DEBUG macros in fill_members().
Done. We have to proceed with the approach now, as the basic concept
of ghost
members shifted a little bit in coparison with the original patch set.
Ghost
attribute now co-exists with the memberuid, they don't overlap on any
level
whatsoever.
NACK,
the wrong number of result is sent back to client if both memberuigd and
ghosrt are present as memnum is reset each time.
The sum of actual members + ghost memebers need to be sent back to the
client.
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York