Michael Ströder wrote:
Christopher Wood wrote:
What stops you from checking the ldif of cn=config into revision control
before and after a change?
Nothing. But it's more cumbersome. Also comments are lost. Normally I comment
everything and describe for which requirement in the concept the ACLs
Michael Ströder wrote:
Nick Milas wrote:
On 2/7/2011 2:53 μμ, Simone Piccardi wrote:
I don't think there are comments inside cn=config, and
those are very important when you have to document and track tens of
different installations.
Indeed, it seems that the config schema does not include a
Chan Wilson wrote:
The ability to do manual disaster-recovery/emergency config changes is
crucial. But you also have to understand that going this route is for
*emergencies* - it is not the way to go for routine administrative tasks.
One item I've always wondered about the RTC desi
--On Saturday, July 02, 2011 1:36 PM -0500 Chan Wilson
wrote:
And recognizing that emergencies *do* happen, and having a Plan of Action
is key to responding to emergencies correctly, what *is* the proper way
to manually edit cn=config? Particularly in a replicated RTC setup?
I figure it's s
> The ability to do manual disaster-recovery/emergency config changes is
> crucial. But you also have to understand that going this route is for
> *emergencies* - it is not the way to go for routine administrative tasks.
One item I've always wondered about the RTC design -- with all the other
det
Nick Milas wrote:
> On 2/7/2011 2:53 μμ, Simone Piccardi wrote:
>> I don't think there are comments inside cn=config, and
>> those are very important when you have to document and track tens of
>> different installations.
>
> Indeed, it seems that the config schema does not include a "description"
On 2/7/2011 2:53 μμ, Simone Piccardi wrote:
...
I don't think there are comments inside cn=config, and
those are very important when you have to document and track tens of
different installations.
Indeed, it seems that the config schema does not include a "description"
(or similar) attribut
Christopher Wood wrote:
> What stops you from checking the ldif of cn=config into revision control
> before and after a change?
Nothing. But it's more cumbersome. Also comments are lost. Normally I comment
everything and describe for which requirement in the concept the ACLs,
constraints, etc. are
Il 02/07/2011 00:47, Christopher Wood ha scritto:
> What stops you from checking the ldif of cn=config into revision control
> before and after a change?
Complexity, because you have to add more steps to have less
informations. I don't think there are comments inside cn=config, and
those are very
