sssd-1.14.3 milestone cleanup

[Jakub Hrozek]

Hi,

despite new development happening in the sssd-1-15 branch (aka master),
there are still too many tickets in the 1.14.3 milestone. The tickets
should be moved out to current milestones unless someone is really
working on them.

These are:
    * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063 - add an integration test for the configuration include directories
    - would it be enough to have two users in two search bases and drop
    a snippet with the second base, then try to resolve a user? If yes,
    this is a one-hour effort, any takers? If not, move to CI milestone
    - Lukas said there would be issue with integration test would be
    how to detect whether libini_config suports it (rhel6 does not
    support it). Therefore I suggest we move the ticket to CI milestone.

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3085 - looks fixed in
     https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/sssd.git/commit/?id=11540d9efb85b9ed0341e8...
     OK to close?
    - Lukas already added a +1 last week on our meeting, so I'll
    probably close the ticket.

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3197 - add a line to sssd-ad
      man page on how does the POSIX attrs in GC work
      - Someone suggested reverting the logic for POSIX-attrs-in-GC lately,
      but I forgot the details, does anyone remember? Otherwise this is
      a 5-minute patch, so I suggest just closing it.

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed information
    about config-check option
     - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just close it

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3222 - sssd still showing ipa
    user after removed from last group
     - unless anyone is actively working on the ticket, just move to
       patches welcome

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2554 - Update spec file according
    to updated guidelines
     - Unless anyone would like to clean up our reference upstream specfile,
       I suggest we close the ticket

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
     - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any takers?

* https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
    * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
     - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation

After this milestone is cleaned up, I'll finally populate the 1.15 Beta
milestone..

[Lukas Slebodnik]

On (11/01/17 16:31), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> despite new development happening in the sssd-1-15 branch (aka master),
> there are still too many tickets in the 1.14.3 milestone. The tickets
> should be moved out to current milestones unless someone is really
> working on them.
>
> These are:
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063 - add an integration test for the configuration include directories
> would it be enough to have two users in two search bases and drop
>
> a snippet with the second base, then try to resolve a user? If yes,
>    this is a one-hour effort, any takers? If not, move to CI milestone
> Lukas said there would be issue with integration test would be
>
> how to detect whether libini_config suports it (rhel6 does not
>    support it). Therefore I suggest we move the ticket to CI milestone.
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3085 - looks fixed in
> https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/sssd.git/commit/?id=11540d9efb85b9ed0341e8a1fc97fc078c6ce418
> OK to close?
> Lukas already added a +1 last week on our meeting, so I'll
>
> probably close the ticket.

yes, but Michal might check wheter the commit is good enough for him.
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3197 - add a line to sssd-ad
> man page on how does the POSIX attrs in GC work
> Someone suggested reverting the logic for POSIX-attrs-in-GC lately,
>
> but I forgot the details, does anyone remember? Otherwise this is
> a 5-minute patch, so I suggest just closing it.
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed information
>
> about config-check option
>     - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just close it

I think that issue is with mninimal manual page.
There is just following paragraph

AVAILABLE COMMANDS
       To list all available commands run sssctl without any parameters. To
       print help for selected command run sssctl COMMAND --help.

We might do the same as in dnf

SYNOPSIS
       sssctl [options] <command> [<args>...]

Available commands:

* domain-list
           * domain-status

and then describe Commands in details.
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3222 - sssd still showing ipa
>
> user after removed from last group
>     - unless anyone is actively working on the ticket, just move to
>       patches welcome

This ticket was caught as part of testing Web_App_Authentication.
@see related BZ. Do we want to ignore such bugs?
It might affect integration effort.
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2554 - Update spec file according
>
> to updated guidelines
>     - Unless anyone would like to clean up our reference upstream specfile,
>       I suggest we close the ticket

There are still parts which need to be updated in spec file.
     I sent some patches from time to time to decrease them. Because
     it's not a priority.

We might move it to "patches welcome" bucket
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any takers?
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
> - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation

Could you provide numbers/data?
        It would be good to know what is a "very little benefit"
        But I'm fine with closing #3074

LS

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:52:32PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (11/01/17 16:31), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > despite new development happening in the sssd-1-15 branch (aka master),
> > there are still too many tickets in the 1.14.3 milestone. The tickets
> > should be moved out to current milestones unless someone is really
> > working on them.
> >
> > These are:
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063 - add an integration test for the configuration include directories
> > would it be enough to have two users in two search bases and drop
> >
> > a snippet with the second base, then try to resolve a user? If yes,
> >    this is a one-hour effort, any takers? If not, move to CI milestone
> > Lukas said there would be issue with integration test would be
> >
> > how to detect whether libini_config suports it (rhel6 does not
> >    support it). Therefore I suggest we move the ticket to CI milestone.
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3085 - looks fixed in
> > https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/sssd.git/commit/?id=11540d9efb85b9ed0341e8a1fc97fc078c6ce418
> > OK to close?
> > Lukas already added a +1 last week on our meeting, so I'll
> >
> > probably close the ticket.
>  yes, but Michal might check wheter the commit is good enough for him.

This one was already closed.
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3197 - add a line to sssd-ad
> > man page on how does the POSIX attrs in GC work
> > Someone suggested reverting the logic for POSIX-attrs-in-GC lately,
> >
> > but I forgot the details, does anyone remember? Otherwise this is
> > a 5-minute patch, so I suggest just closing it.
> >
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed information
> >
> > about config-check option
> >     - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just close it
>
> I think that issue is with mninimal manual page.
> There is just following paragraph
>
> AVAILABLE COMMANDS
>        To list all available commands run sssctl without any parameters. To
>        print help for selected command run sssctl COMMAND --help.
>
> We might do the same as in dnf
>
> SYNOPSIS
>        sssctl [options] <command> [<args>...]
>    Available commands:
>
>        * domain-list
>        * domain-status
>
> and then describe Commands in details.

Michal, do you have an opinon here? If this is something that can be
fixed quickly (several hours max), then let's just get the ticket out of
our radar.
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3222 - sssd still showing ipa
> >
> > user after removed from last group
> >     - unless anyone is actively working on the ticket, just move to
> >       patches welcome
>
> This ticket was caught as part of testing Web_App_Authentication.
> @see related BZ. Do we want to ignore such bugs?
> It might affect integration effort.

I'm just worried that noone is working on the bug and that we don't even
know how to fix it.
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2554 - Update spec file according
> >
> > to updated guidelines
> >     - Unless anyone would like to clean up our reference upstream specfile,
> >       I suggest we close the ticket
>  There are still parts which need to be updated in spec file.
>  I sent some patches from time to time to decrease them. Because
>  it's not a priority.
>
>  We might move it to "patches welcome" bucket

OK, moved.
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> > - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any takers?
> >
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
> > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
> > - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation
>     Could you provide numbers/data?
>     It would be good to know what is a "very little benefit"
>     But I'm fine with closing #3074

of course you are right. I re-run the tests and added measurements into
#3097 (now I think 3097 can be closed because the purpose was only to
add the measurements) and with what the benchmarks show is quite
conslusive in the sense that #3074 can be closed or moved into patches
welcome.

Please let me know if you disagree, otherwise I'll close 3097 and move
3074 into patches welcome.

[Michal Židek]

On 02/02/2017 11:36 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:52:32PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > On (11/01/17 16:31), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > despite new development happening in the sssd-1-15 branch (aka master),
> > > there are still too many tickets in the 1.14.3 milestone. The tickets
> > > should be moved out to current milestones unless someone is really
> > > working on them.
> > >
> > > These are:
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063 - add an integration test for the configuration include directories
> > > would it be enough to have two users in two search bases and drop
> > >
> > > a snippet with the second base, then try to resolve a user? If yes,
> > >    this is a one-hour effort, any takers? If not, move to CI milestone
> > > Lukas said there would be issue with integration test would be
> > >
> > > how to detect whether libini_config suports it (rhel6 does not
> > >    support it). Therefore I suggest we move the ticket to CI milestone.
> > > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3085 - looks fixed in
> > > https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/sssd.git/commit/?id=11540d9efb85b9ed0341e8a1fc97fc078c6ce418
> > > OK to close?
> > > Lukas already added a +1 last week on our meeting, so I'll
> > >
> > > probably close the ticket.
> >  yes, but Michal might check wheter the commit is good enough for him.
>
> This one was already closed.

I actually sent the patch that closed the ticket as a reaction to
this thread, but forgot to respond after.
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3197 - add a line to sssd-ad
> > > man page on how does the POSIX attrs in GC work
> > > Someone suggested reverting the logic for POSIX-attrs-in-GC lately,
> > >
> > > but I forgot the details, does anyone remember? Otherwise this is
> > > a 5-minute patch, so I suggest just closing it.
> > >
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed information
> > >
> > > about config-check option
> > >     - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just close it
> >
> > I think that issue is with mninimal manual page.
> > There is just following paragraph
> >
> > AVAILABLE COMMANDS
> >        To list all available commands run sssctl without any parameters. To
> >        print help for selected command run sssctl COMMAND --help.
> >
> > We might do the same as in dnf
> >
> > SYNOPSIS
> >        sssctl [options] <command> [<args>...]
> >    Available commands:
> >
> >        * domain-list
> >        * domain-status
> >
> > and then describe Commands in details.
>
> Michal, do you have an opinon here? If this is something that can be
> fixed quickly (several hours max), then let's just get the ticket out of
> our radar.

The original idea was to keep the manual page minimal and move most
of the help in the --help output for each command. The reason was to
not have the same info on two places (man page and help). Now, we
do have the part with minimal man page finished :D , but the --help
does not contain enough help for most commands. I do not know how
much time will it take to write the missing documentation, from
what I see, each command is missing something like general description
in the --help output, so it does not seem to be that much work.

I can do it after I finish the SELinux bugs, it should not take much
time.
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3222 - sssd still showing ipa
> > >
> > > user after removed from last group
> > >     - unless anyone is actively working on the ticket, just move to
> > >       patches welcome
> >
> > This ticket was caught as part of testing Web_App_Authentication.
> > @see related BZ. Do we want to ignore such bugs?
> > It might affect integration effort.
>
> I'm just worried that noone is working on the bug and that we don't even
> know how to fix it.
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2554 - Update spec file according
> > >
> > > to updated guidelines
> > >     - Unless anyone would like to clean up our reference upstream specfile,
> > >       I suggest we close the ticket
> >  There are still parts which need to be updated in spec file.
> >  I sent some patches from time to time to decrease them. Because
> >  it's not a priority.
> >
> >  We might move it to "patches welcome" bucket
>
> OK, moved.
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> > > - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any takers?
> > >
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
> > > - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation
> >     Could you provide numbers/data?
> >     It would be good to know what is a "very little benefit"
> >     But I'm fine with closing #3074
>
> of course you are right. I re-run the tests and added measurements into
> #3097 (now I think 3097 can be closed because the purpose was only to
> add the measurements) and with what the benchmarks show is quite
> conslusive in the sense that #3074 can be closed or moved into patches
> welcome.
>
> Please let me know if you disagree, otherwise I'll close 3097 and move
> 3074 into patches welcome.

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 12:30:16PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed information
> > > >
> > > > about config-check option
> > > >     - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just close it
> > >
> > > I think that issue is with mninimal manual page.
> > > There is just following paragraph
> > >
> > > AVAILABLE COMMANDS
> > >        To list all available commands run sssctl without any parameters. To
> > >        print help for selected command run sssctl COMMAND --help.
> > >
> > > We might do the same as in dnf
> > >
> > > SYNOPSIS
> > >        sssctl [options] <command> [<args>...]
> > >    Available commands:
> > >
> > >        * domain-list
> > >        * domain-status
> > >
> > > and then describe Commands in details.
> >
> > Michal, do you have an opinon here? If this is something that can be
> > fixed quickly (several hours max), then let's just get the ticket out of
> > our radar.
>
> The original idea was to keep the manual page minimal and move most
> of the help in the --help output for each command. The reason was to
> not have the same info on two places (man page and help). Now, we
> do have the part with minimal man page finished :D , but the --help
> does not contain enough help for most commands. I do not know how
> much time will it take to write the missing documentation, from
> what I see, each command is missing something like general description
> in the --help output, so it does not seem to be that much work.
>
> I can do it after I finish the SELinux bugs, it should not take much
> time.

OK, if it requires more than a couple of hours, please use the ticket to
a later milestone.

[Lukas Slebodnik]

On (02/02/17 11:36), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:52:32PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > On (11/01/17 16:31), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
> > > - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation
> >     Could you provide numbers/data?
> >     It would be good to know what is a "very little benefit"
> >     But I'm fine with closing #3074
>
> of course you are right. I re-run the tests and added measurements into
> #3097 (now I think 3097 can be closed because the purpose was only to
> add the measurements) and with what the benchmarks show is quite
> conslusive in the sense that #3074 can be closed or moved into patches
> welcome.
>
> Please let me know if you disagree, otherwise I'll close 3097 and move
> 3074 into patches welcome.

I assume you tried to run it more time and you got simillar results

I think we can close them.

LS

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 01:43:55PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (02/02/17 11:36), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:52:32PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > > On (11/01/17 16:31), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
> > > > https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
> > > > - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation
> > >     Could you provide numbers/data?
> > >     It would be good to know what is a "very little benefit"
> > >     But I'm fine with closing #3074
> >
> > of course you are right. I re-run the tests and added measurements into
> > #3097 (now I think 3097 can be closed because the purpose was only to
> > add the measurements) and with what the benchmarks show is quite
> > conslusive in the sense that #3074 can be closed or moved into patches
> > welcome.
> >
> > Please let me know if you disagree, otherwise I'll close 3097 and move
> > 3074 into patches welcome.
>
> I assume you tried to run it more time and you got simillar results

of course :) all the runs for this user were between 30-35 seconds for
both cases (the user was a member of about 500 groups)
> I think we can close them.

OK

[Petr Cech]

On 01/11/2017 04:31 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> despite new development happening in the sssd-1-15 branch (aka master),
> there are still too many tickets in the 1.14.3 milestone. The tickets
> should be moved out to current milestones unless someone is really
> working on them.
>
> These are:
>     * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063 - add an integration test for the configuration include directories
> would it be enough to have two users in two search bases and drop
>
> a snippet with the second base, then try to resolve a user? If yes,
>    this is a one-hour effort, any takers? If not, move to CI milestone
> Lukas said there would be issue with integration test would be
>
> how to detect whether libini_config suports it (rhel6 does not
>    support it). Therefore I suggest we move the ticket to CI milestone.
>  * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3085 - looks fixed in
>  https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/sssd.git/commit/?id=11540d9efb85b9ed0341e8a1fc97fc078c6ce418
>  OK to close?
> Lukas already added a +1 last week on our meeting, so I'll
>
> probably close the ticket.
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3197 - add a line to sssd-ad
>   man page on how does the POSIX attrs in GC work
>   - Someone suggested reverting the logic for POSIX-attrs-in-GC lately,
>   but I forgot the details, does anyone remember? Otherwise this is
>   a 5-minute patch, so I suggest just closing it.
>
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed information
> about config-check option
>  - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just close it
>
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3222 - sssd still showing ipa
> user after removed from last group
>  - unless anyone is actively working on the ticket, just move to
>    patches welcome
>
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2554 - Update spec file according
> to updated guidelines
>  - Unless anyone would like to clean up our reference upstream specfile,
>    I suggest we close the ticket
>
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
>  - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any takers?

I looked at this ticket and I saw that we have no configuration options 
in sssd-sudo.

We just say in sssd-sudo:
"There are many configuration options that can be used to adjust the 
behavior. Please refer to "ldap_sudo_*" in sssd-ldap(5) and "sudo_*" in 
sssd.conf(5)."

I am not sure if it is good idea to move exactly one option to this man 
page. Any other opinions?
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache to tmpfs
> * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
>  - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation
>
> After this milestone is cleaned up, I'll finally populate the 1.15 Beta
> milestone..
> _______________________________________________
> sssd-devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

Regards

[Pavel Březina]

On 01/12/2017 01:49 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
> On 01/11/2017 04:31 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > despite new development happening in the sssd-1-15 branch (aka master),
> > there are still too many tickets in the 1.14.3 milestone. The tickets
> > should be moved out to current milestones unless someone is really
> > working on them.
> >
> > These are:
> >     * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3063 - add an integration
> > test for the configuration include directories
> >     - would it be enough to have two users in two search bases and drop
> >     a snippet with the second base, then try to resolve a user? If yes,
> >     this is a one-hour effort, any takers? If not, move to CI milestone
> >     - Lukas said there would be issue with integration test would be
> >     how to detect whether libini_config suports it (rhel6 does not
> >     support it). Therefore I suggest we move the ticket to CI milestone.
> >  * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3085 - looks fixed in
> >
> > https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/sssd.git/commit/?id=11540d9efb85b9ed0341e8...
> >  OK to close?
> > - Lukas already added a +1 last week on our meeting, so I'll
> > probably close the ticket.
> >
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3197 - add a line to sssd-ad
> >   man page on how does the POSIX attrs in GC work
> >   - Someone suggested reverting the logic for POSIX-attrs-in-GC
> >
> > lately,
> >       but I forgot the details, does anyone remember? Otherwise this is
> >       a 5-minute patch, so I suggest just closing it.
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3208 - Need detailed
> >
> > information
> >     about config-check option
> >      - what is this ticket about? Do we need it? I suggest we just
> > close it
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3222 - sssd still showing ipa
> > user after removed from last group
> >  - unless anyone is actively working on the ticket, just move to
> >    patches welcome
> >
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2554 - Update spec file
> >
> > according
> >     to updated guidelines
> >      - Unless anyone would like to clean up our reference upstream
> > specfile,
> >        I suggest we close the ticket
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move
> >
> > sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> >      - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any
> > takers?
>
> I looked at this ticket and I saw that we have no configuration options
> in sssd-sudo.
>
> We just say in sssd-sudo:
> "There are many configuration options that can be used to adjust the
> behavior. Please refer to "ldap_sudo_*" in sssd-ldap(5) and "sudo_*" in
> sssd.conf(5)."
>
> I am not sure if it is good idea to move exactly one option to this man
> page. Any other opinions?

All or nothing.
> > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3074 - Move timestamp cache
> >
> > to tmpfs
> >     * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3097 - Measure the
> > difference between tmpfs database and NOSYNC database
> >      - tmpfs provides very little benefit, close with an explanation
> >
> > After this milestone is cleaned up, I'll finally populate the 1.15 Beta
> > milestone..
> > _______________________________________________
> > sssd-devel mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> Regards

[Petr Cech]

On 01/12/2017 02:02 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move
> > >
> > > sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> > >      - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any
> > > takers?
> >
> > I looked at this ticket and I saw that we have no configuration options
> > in sssd-sudo.
> >
> > We just say in sssd-sudo:
> > "There are many configuration options that can be used to adjust the
> > behavior. Please refer to "ldap_sudo_*" in sssd-ldap(5) and "sudo_*" in
> > sssd.conf(5)."
> >
> > I am not sure if it is good idea to move exactly one option to this man
> > page. Any other opinions?
>
> All or nothing.

Then I vote for nothing. It is better if all options are on the same place.

Regards

[Lukas Slebodnik]

On (12/01/17 15:29), Petr Cech wrote:
> On 01/12/2017 02:02 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move
> > > >
> > > > sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> > > >      - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any
> > > > takers?
> > >
> > > I looked at this ticket and I saw that we have no configuration options
> > > in sssd-sudo.
> > >
> > > We just say in sssd-sudo:
> > > "There are many configuration options that can be used to adjust the
> > > behavior. Please refer to "ldap_sudo_*" in sssd-ldap(5) and "sudo_*" in
> > > sssd.conf(5)."
> > >
> > > I am not sure if it is good idea to move exactly one option to this man
> > > page. Any other opinions?
> >
> > All or nothing.
>
> Then I vote for nothing. It is better if all options are on the same place.

ldap_sudo_* options are related to back-end and therefore it make sense
to have them in sssd-ldap(5).

sssd-sudo(5) does not have any responder related options ATM.
And we have all responder related options documented in sssd.conf(5)
IMHO, it is fine to keep the documentation of sudo_timed in sssd.conf(5)

There's also a reference to sssd-sudo(5) in sssd.conf(5)

Summary:
I am not persuaded that the ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113
is the best idea. There's also a reference to sssd-sudo(5) in sssd.conf(5)

LS

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 05:02:26PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (12/01/17 15:29), Petr Cech wrote:
> > On 01/12/2017 02:02 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> > > > > * https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113 - Please move
> > > > >
> > > > > sudo_timed option to sssd-sudo man page
> > > > >      - 5 minutes patch and George is unlikely to send a patch, any
> > > > > takers?
> > > >
> > > > I looked at this ticket and I saw that we have no configuration options
> > > > in sssd-sudo.
> > > >
> > > > We just say in sssd-sudo:
> > > > "There are many configuration options that can be used to adjust the
> > > > behavior. Please refer to "ldap_sudo_*" in sssd-ldap(5) and "sudo_*" in
> > > > sssd.conf(5)."
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure if it is good idea to move exactly one option to this man
> > > > page. Any other opinions?
> > >
> > > All or nothing.
> >
> > Then I vote for nothing. It is better if all options are on the same place.
>
> ldap_sudo_* options are related to back-end and therefore it make sense
> to have them in sssd-ldap(5).
>
> sssd-sudo(5) does not have any responder related options ATM.
> And we have all responder related options documented in sssd.conf(5)
> IMHO, it is fine to keep the documentation of sudo_timed in sssd.conf(5)
>
> There's also a reference to sssd-sudo(5) in sssd.conf(5)
>
> Summary:
> I am not persuaded that the ticket https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3113
> is the best idea. There's also a reference to sssd-sudo(5) in sssd.conf(5)

In that case, let's close the ticket.