[SSSD] RFC: Backporting Nikolai's DEBUG patches to sssd-1-11

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Tue Apr 29 14:09:53 UTC 2014


On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 03:53:37PM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 03:45:36PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > On 04/29/2014 03:24 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >we've been keeping the sssd-1-11 branch fairly conservative recently,
> > >mostly as a precaution to not break downstreams that consume sssd-1-11,
> > >like RHEL.
> > >
> > >But some relatively larger features, such as the InfoPipe responder,
> > >need to be backported to sssd-1-11 (and by extension to RHEL-6) now. One
> > >large difference between master and sssd-1-11 are the DEBUG messages and
> > >I'd like to propose that we backport the new DEBUG messages to sssd-1-11
> > >and mass-convert the callers the same way we did in master.
> > >
> > >I think backporting the DEBUG messages change would be relatively
> > >low-risk, as the messages don't generally affect the behaviour of the
> > >daemon.
> > >
> > >The big downside of course is that we break git-blame and cause a bit of
> > >churn in sssd-1-11. But I think this downside it outweighted by not
> > >having to backport each and every DEBUG message from patches we'll be
> > >pulling in from master to sssd-1-11, which is all the SBUS changes Stef
> > >did recently and also all the work on the IFP responder.
> > >
> > >The next step would be backporting the SBUS changes, but I'd prefer a
> > >separate thread about those.
> > >
> > >Thoughts?
> > 
> > +1
> 
> +1
> 
> bye,
> Sumit

Nikolai, do you have time to do the backport before you leave for
vacation or would you like some help?



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list