[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Olc deployment vs slapd.conf based deployment



--On Friday, September 15, 2017 8:49 PM +0200 Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> wrote:
Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Friday, September 15, 2017 7:57 PM +0200 Michael Ströder
<michael@stroeder.com> wrote:
I strongly disagree. It's a schema shipped by OpenLDAP
installation. So this update should have simply worked.
Since the schema is stored in the cn=config DB, there's not an
option to replace the ppolicy LDIF in cn=config on upgrade.  It
has to be scripted.
I fully understand the technical reason for what went wrong.

But the sysadmin should not be required to script anything in case a
schema file always shipped by OpenLDAP was updated by a regular OpenLDAP
update. It should simply work like it does with other LDAP server
implementations and cn=config.
The OpenLDAP project only provides one thing -- Source code.  So no, the 
sysadmin is actually responsible for ensuring upgrade procedures between 
versions work for their deployment.  If they are using a build of OpenLDAP 
provided by their OS vendor, then the OS vendor is going to be responsible. 
However, it is non-trivial for the OS vendor to be aware of what 
configuration(s) a given end-user is using, and whether or not they are 
affected by any specific change.
Again why I think this particular change should not have gone into RE24. 
It was a significant breaking change that is non-trivial for end users to 
deal with.  We generally keep such things out of RE24.  There are many 
great logging updates in RE25 for example that can be incredibly helpful 
for people on RE24 (operation duration, TLS cipher suite logging, etc), but 
we don't pull them in as it could break tools that depend on the existing 
2.4 format.
--Quanah


--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
<http://www.symas.com>