[389-users] 1.2.11.29 prediction?

[Morgan Jones]

On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:11 PM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 04/03/2014 02:56 PM, Morgan Jones wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 3:39 PM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins at redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 04/03/2014 01:35 PM, Michael Gettes wrote:
>>>> Yeah, I hear what you’re saying.  47758 is due to running bleeding edge, i get it.  but i had to go there cuz I was having problems with objects getting messed up with .15 in production and even .25 in test and I went to .28 which had the SASL fix on top of .26 which fixed all object problems.  The object problems were the emails I sent to the list indicating objects I couldn’t delete or modify and .28 fixed those problems.  This is where i feel i was a little trapped and had to come forward to the bleeding edge.  there was a method to my madness and didn’t this just willy nilly and hence where i was hoping for .29 to i might have a good mix of things - even if it was on the bleeding edge.  i hope this makes sense.
>>> Yes, and we are working on fixing those issues in EL6.6.  So perhaps when EL6.6 is released you will be able to use the OS packages.
>> Rich et al,
>> 
>> I've been following this thread with interest.   I am however a little confused about the right place and version to get 389:
>> 
>> you make a distinction between the source version (versions 1.2.11.28 and 1.3.1.16).  Both are stable, 1.3.1 is just newer and potentially more bleeding edge?  1.3.1 also seems to not be available from either the OS or epel repositories.
> 
> 1.2.11 branch is strictly maintenance - only the most critical patches.
> 
> 1.3.1 branch is less strict - it may get new features.
> 
> 1.3.1 is available for Fecdora 19.  1.3.1 will be in EL7.  We are not planning to provide it in EPEL7 at this time.

Thanks, that makes sense.

> 
>> And if epel6 contains patches that have not been fully tested and I should avoid it in production but how do I get the admin server, console etc?
> 
> There is a distinction between "epel6" and the official EPEL6.  What we call "389-ds-base" in "epel6" is not really the official EPEL6 repository.  It is an individual developer provided and supported fedorapeople (and now copr) repository strictly for those who want to (or must) be on the "bleeding" edge of the 1.2.11 branch - those who absolutely require bug fixes or features that are present in the upstream 1.2.11 branch, but are not yet in the official EL6.5 389-ds-base package.

I understand.   I didn't catch the distinction between "EPEL6" and "epel6."  

Where is the (lowercase) epel6/copr repository?   I know I've seen the fedora people repository in the past but I can't for the life of me find it (or copr) now.  I see various pages but not the repository itself.

thanks for the clarifications,

-morgan



>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Michael Gettes <gettes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I recognize 389 is a community project and asking for timelines can be problematic.  Right now, I am sorta stuck between a rock and a hard place.  In production, I am on 1.2.11.15 which has problems that are fixed by 1.2.11.28.  I have 1.2.11.28 in test and fixes all my prod problems but introduces a new problem which makes it rather difficult to manage the environment and it would appear this will be corrected in 1.2.11.29.  So, I am a little curious as to when we might see 29.  I do see on the roadmap 29 has 4 closed and 5 active but no date set.
>> 
>> Wouldn't this be a good time for Michael to consider 1.3.1?
> 
> Sure, but we are not considering providing 1.3.1 rpms for EL6 at this time.  That means building/packaging/repository/updating manually.
> 
>> 
>> thanks,
>> 
>> -morgan
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
> 
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> 389-users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users