[SSSD] [PATCH] 0001-Copy-edit SSSD-LDAP man page

Stephen Gallagher sgallagh at redhat.com
Thu Jan 14 12:55:12 UTC 2010


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/14/2010 07:42 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 01/13/2010 09:13 PM, David O'Brien wrote:
>> Updated patch attached
>> A couple of comments inline
> 
>> /David
> 
>> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 01/12/2010 06:58 PM, David O'Brien wrote:
>>>> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> On 01/11/2010 09:33 PM, David O'Brien wrote:
>>>>>> Fix typos, review grammar, apply a few standards.
>>>>>>
>>>>> - -            If there are no more servers to try, the back end as
>>>>> a whole
>>>>> +            If there are no more machines to try, the back end as a
>>>>> whole
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure I agree with this change. We're talking about the servers
>>>>> that provide the authentication or identity data here. I'm not sure
>>>>> "machines" is expressive enough.
>>>> I wrestled with this for a while... the previous two paragraphs talk
>>>> about "machines" and "services", while the first paras talk about
>>>> servers. Other doc that I've looked at talks about "hosts". I think
>>>> if you want to maintain "server" in the statement above, we should be
>>>> using "server" and not "machine" throughout the section. What do  you
>>>> think?
>>>
>>> I think we need to define our terms better.
> 
>> agree 100%
> 
>>  I read "server" in the
>>> context of failover as the union of a machine and a service. A machine
>>> may run several different services, and a service may run on several
>>> different machines.
> 
>> And not only in the context of failover. What's a web server? A machine
>> + httpd? Same for a name server?
> 
>>>
>>> I propose we define these terms more accurately, and then fix the
>>> sentence:
> 
>> Consistent definition of terms is something we consistently wrestle with
>> in ECS. We are working on a Style Guide to address this, however, so
>> hopefully we're only getting better :-)
>>>
>>> If the service connection attempt fails, then only this particular
>>> service is considered offline and the back end automatically switches
>>> over to the next service.
>>>
>>> To instead read:
>>> If the service connection attempt fails, then only this particular
>>> service is considered offline and the back end automatically switches
>>> over to the next server.
> 
>> Fixed
> 
>>>
>>>
>>> To summarize:
>>> machine: physical or virtual host that can run a service
>>> service: An LDAP directory server or Kerberos KDC, etc. running on a
>>> machine
>>> server: A machine/service pair.
>>>
>>>>>                              Some directory servers, for example Active
>>>>> Directory,
>>>>> - -                            might deliver the realm part of the UPN
>>>>> lower case
>>>>> - -                            which may cause the authentication to
>>>>> fail.
>>>>> Set this
>>>>> - -                            option to a non-zero value, if you
>>>>> want to
>>>>> use an
>>>>> - -                            upper case realm.
>>>>> +                            might deliver the realm part of the UPN in
>>>>> lower case,
>>>>> +                            which might cause the authentication to
>>>>> fail. Set this
>>>>> +                            option to a non-zero value if you want to
>>>>> use an
>>>>> +                            upper-case realm.
>>>>>
>>>>> The existing description is out of date. "a non-zero value" should be
>>>>> "true" now.
>>>> Fixed.
>>>>
>>>>> Please try to stay within coding standards. You have extended several
>>>>> lines beyond the 79-character limit. (This limit exists so that the
>>>>> source files can be viewed easily in a standard 80-character terminal
>>>>> window without wrapping or horizontal scrolling)
>>>> This is what my question about formatting was attempting to address.
>>>> I was aware my changes were outside the original format, but wondered
>>>> if that was something I needed to address myself or something that
>>>> got handled by xslt processing or what. (I'm used to our own
>>>> publishing system, which does all that for us.)
>>>> So far I haven't been able to get Kate to do the right thing, and I
>>>> tried to download and install manedit a couple of times but that's
>>>> not playing nice either (website appears to be dead). I use CSB so
>>>> I'm a bit limited in what I have access to :-\
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, I was unclear on what you meant. You can format the XML documents
>>> with any spacing you want... when processing it to turn it into the
>>> final manpage, it handles all whitespace appropriately. As part of our
>>> project's coding standard, however, line lengths should be limited to 79
>>> characters unless completely unavoidable.
>>>
>>> Formatting the XML document is a manual process. Most text editors have
>>> a way to display which column you are currently typing into, and many
>>> have autowrap capabilities that can be set in the options.
>>>
>>> Gedit, for example, displays "Ln 1, col 32" in the lower righthand
>>> corner of the editing window to keep track of this. I know Gedit is
>>> available to you. Bonus points: it does XML syntax highlighting.
> 
>> I have this in Kate (but I'm trying Gedit to see how I like it), but I'm
>> also curious about was the auto-indent (or lack of it) once you get into
>> sections, subsections, paras, etc. I guess this is the price I pay for
>> being used to scripts, processing tools, etc., that do things for me :D
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Since I know you're new to git, the process for amending a patch is as
>>>>> follows (assuming that you do not have additional patches beyond this
>>>>> one in your private repository):
>>>>>
>>>>> Make your new changes as if you were creating a new patch. When you go
>>>>> to commit them to your private repository, use the command 'git commit
>>>>> - --amend' This will merge your current changes into the last patch
>>>>> committed to your tree.
>>>> I'll do this when we sort the server/machine question, thanks.
>>>>
>>>>> If you have other patches in your repository after this one, that
>>>>> requires a bit more massaging with a 'git rebase -i' command, and you
>>>>> should probably catch someone in #freeipa to walk you through it the
>>>>> first time.
>>>> No more patches right now.
>>>> Thanks for your help and patience.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - -- Stephen Gallagher
>>> RHCE 804006346421761
>>>
> 
> 
> Ah, I forgot to add in my last review that we should change:
> "the back end as a whole switches to offline mode for a certain period
> of time." to
> "the back end as a whole switches to offline mode. We will attempt to
> reconnect online every 30 seconds."
> 
> I will make this minor edit myself and push your changes. Thanks!
> 
> Ack.
> 
> 

Here's my new version, slightly modified from what I said above.

- -- 
Stephen Gallagher
RHCE 804006346421761

Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.
http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAktPFC8ACgkQeiVVYja6o6MCfQCdGUeo47NdgTOUW7PR9DxzqsxO
maQAn211GwaAshAJwcWEB1qt395GQEjf
=7TPn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Copy-edit-mainly-fixing-typos-and-English.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 21207 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/attachments/20100114/f68d2752/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Copy-edit-mainly-fixing-typos-and-English.patch.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 72 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/sssd-devel/attachments/20100114/f68d2752/attachment.sig>


More information about the sssd-devel mailing list