[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH]Extending user plugin with employeenumber field

Misnyovszki Adam amisnyov at redhat.com
Wed Mar 26 13:07:50 UTC 2014


On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:26:53 +0100
Misnyovszki Adam <amisnyov at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:31:15 +0100
> Petr Vobornik <pvoborni at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 21.3.2014 11:00, Misnyovszki Adam wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:13:55 +0100
> > > Misnyovszki Adam <amisnyov at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 16:06:27 +0100
> > >> Petr Vobornik <pvoborni at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On 21.2.2014 15:45, Adam Misnyovszki wrote:
> > >>>> Hi,
> > >>>> According to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2798 ipa client and
> > >>>> web ui extended with employeenumber field.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4165
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Question is, that should we extend user with other fields which
> > >>>> are in the RFC, (carLicense, departmentNumber, employeeType,
> > >>>> etc) if we already touched this code?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks
> > >>>> Adam
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> +        Int('employeenumber?',
> > >>> +            label=_('Employee ID'),
> > >>> +            minvalue=1,
> > >>> +        ),
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Why Int and different label? IMO it should be Str and 'Employee
> > >>> Number'
> > >>>
> > >>> 2.4. Employee Number
> > >>>
> > >>>      Numeric or alphanumeric identifier assigned to a person,
> > >>> typically based on order of hire or association with an
> > >>> organization. Single valued.
> > >>>
> > >>>       ( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.1.3
> > >>>         NAME 'employeeNumber'
> > >>>         DESC 'numerically identifies an employee within an
> > >>> organization' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
> > >>>         SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch
> > >>>         SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
> > >>>         SINGLE-VALUE )
> > >>>
> > >> Hi,
> > >> fixed, also some other fields added. Note, that according to the
> > >> rfc,
> > 
> > >> licence plate field should be multivalue, should I cange that(it
> > >> is an existing field).
> > 
> > yes
> > 
> > 
> > >> Also, should I write test cases(especially for
> > >> preferredlanguage)?
> > 
> > Testing new functionality helps.
> > 
> > >> Greets
> > >> Adam
> > >
> > > self NACK,
> > > VERSION bump because API change
> > 
> > It requires another rebase.
> > 
> > >
> > > Greets
> > > Adam
> > >
> > 
> > 1) Is there a reason to have label 'Employee ID' instead of
> > 'Employee Number' which is in RFC 2798?
> > 
> > +            label=_('Employee ID'),
> > 
> > 
> > 2) Department number seems to be multivalued as well:
> >      ( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.1.2
> >        NAME 'departmentNumber'
> >        DESC 'identifies a department within an organization'
> >        EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
> >        SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch
> >        SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
> > 
> > 3) The regex for preferredlanguage:
> > 
> >    +            pattern='^[a-zA-Z]{1,8}[-[a-zA-Z]{1,8}]?$',
> > 
> > doesn't match the expression in RFC 2068. It's only part of it.
> > 
> > 
> >            Accept-Language = "Accept-Language" ":"
> >                              1#( language-range [ ";" "q" "=" qvalue
> > ] )
> > 
> >            language-range  = ( ( 1*8ALPHA *( "-" 1*8ALPHA ) ) | "*"
> > )
> > 
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2068#section-14.4
> > 
> > RFC 2798 ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2798#section-2.7 ) says
> > that you should omit only the `"Accept-Language" ":"` sequence.
> > 
> > 
> 
> See the updates in the attached patch.
> Greets
> Adam

The preferredLanguage regex pattern and error message has been modified
to comply with RFC, according to conversation with Petr.
Thanks
Adam

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: freeipa-amisnyov-0005-5-Extending-user-plugin-with-inetOrgPerson-fields.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 11968 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20140326/8310f596/attachment.bin>


More information about the Freeipa-devel mailing list