On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Morgan Fainberg <morgan.fainb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Corey Bryant <corey.bry...@canonical.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Morgan Fainberg < >> morgan.fainb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:53 AM, Corey Bryant < >>> corey.bry...@canonical.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> Are there any plans to converge on one ldap client across projects? >>>> Some projects have moved to ldap3 and others are using pyldap (both are in >>>> global requirements). >>>> >>>> The issue we're running into in Ubuntu is that we can only have one >>>> ldap client in Ubuntu main, while the others will live in universe. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Corey >>>> >>>> >>> Out of curiosity, what drives this requirement? pyldap and ldap3 do not >>> overlap in namespace and can co-install just fine. This is no different >>> than previously having python-ldap and ldap3. >>> >>> It seems a little arbitrary to say only one of these can be in main, but >>> this is why i am asking. >>> >>> >> No problem, thanks for asking. I agree, it's no different than >> python-ldap and ldap3 and it's not a co-installability issue. This is just >> a policy for Ubuntu main. If we file a Main Inclusion Request (MIR) for a >> new ldap client then we'll be asked to work on what's needed to get the >> other client package out of main, which consists of patching use of one >> client for the other. >> >> > Ah, ok sure; still sounds a little silly imho, but only so much we can do > on that front ;). So the reality is keystone is > Everything in main is fully supported, so limiting those efforts to a single client makes sense. > considering ldap3, but there have been concerns about ldap3's interface > compared to the relatively tried-and-true pyldap (a clean fork+py3 support > of python-ldap). Long term we may move to ldap3. Short term, we wanted > python3 support, so the drop in replacement for python-ldap was the clear > winner (ldap3 is significantly more work to support, and even when/if we > support it there will be a period where we support both, just in different > drivers). > I like the approach to having different drivers, at least for a transition period. That would be very useful from a distro perspective. > > Basically, if we add ldap3 to keystone, we will be supporting both for a > non-insignificant time. For now we're leaning on pyldap for the foreseeable > future. > > >> Thanks. Appreciate the information! -- Regards, Corey
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev