[Freeipa-devel] Move ipaldap to ipalib?

[John Dennis]

On 01/30/2013 09:41 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 01/30/2013 03:28 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
>> Petr Viktorin wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've noticed that the client installer uses python-ldap directly, and
>>> duplicates some code we already have.
>>>
>>> Most recently, a convert_ldap_error function appeared in ipautil.
>>> Similar mechanisms are already in ipaldap, ipa-csreplica-manage,
>>> ipa-replica-manage, and my patches remove one in ldap2.
>>>
>>> Are there any objections to moving ipaldap.py to ipalib?
>>>
>>
>> ipaldap.py is going away eventually, right?
>
> No, the common code is in ipaldap.py.
> ldap2.py only has the ldap2 class, which is a CRUDBackend, manages the
> magic per-thread connections, and has some extra helpers that can assume
> IPA is installed.
>
>> It is probably better suited for ipapython if we move it though.
>
> Sure, makes no difference to me :)
> To be honest though, I never got the difference between ipalib and
> ipapython. Could you explain it for me?
>

I asked the same question a while ago, see this thread for the answers

https://www.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/2011-October/msg00392.html

FWIW I still couldn't fully reconcile what was said with what is in the 
code, I suspect that's because we might not have been disciplined when 
adding new code. I continue to find it a source of confusion FWIW. What 
was said in that thread implies the client should not depend on ipalib, 
but it does, go figure.

Getting everything partitioned into their logical locations, namespaces, 
imports, etc. is a code clean-up effort that should be addressed at some 
point. Hopefully we'll iterate on that piecemeal, but only if we 
actually understand the rules :-)

-- 
John Dennis <jdennis at redhat.com>

Looking to carve out IT costs?
www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/