[Freeipa-devel] Replace stageuser-add --from-delete with user-undel --to-staged

[thierry bordaz]

On 07/28/2015 12:34 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> Dne 28.7.2015 v 11:36 Lenka Doudova napsal(a):
>>
>>
>> Dne 28.7.2015 v 11:27 Jan Cholasta napsal(a):
>>> Dne 27.7.2015 v 17:59 Martin Basti napsal(a):
>>>> On 23/07/15 14:43, Martin Basti wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I tried to fix #5145 and I partially succeeded.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I cannot fix this part of ticket, where user is prompted to
>>>>> write name and surname.
>>>>>
>>>>> $ ipa stageuser-add tuser --from-delete
>>>>> First name: this will be ignored
>>>>> Last name: this will be also ignored
>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>> Added stage user "tuser"
>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> As the first name and last name are mandatory attributes of
>>>>> stageuser-add command, but they are not needed by when the
>>>>> --from-delete option is used.
>>>>> I would like to ask how to fix this issue, IMO this will be huge hack
>>>>> in internal API. Or should we just document this bug as known issue
>>>>> (thierry wrote that this is not use case that should be used often)?
>>>>>
>>>>> The best solution would be separate command, but this idea was
>>>>> rejected in thread "[Freeipa-devel] User life cycle: question
>>>>> regarding the design"
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Martin^2
>>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> as was mentioned before, we have issue with current internal API 
>>>> and the
>>>> stageuser-add --from-delete command.
>>>>
>>>> We discussed this today, and we did not find a nice way how to fix it,
>>>> so we propose this (which is IMO the best solution):
>>>>
>>>> * stageuser-add --from-delete should be deprecated
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>> * create new option for user-undel: used-undel --to-staged  (or create
>>>> new command) that will handle moving deleted users to staged area as
>>>> --from-delete did.
>>>
>>> Make it new command please.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Instead of stageuser-add and option --from-delete, which work totally
>>>> different, the command user-undel does similar operation than 
>>>> stage-user
>>>> --from-delete, it just uses different container.
>>>
>>> NACK on stuffing everything into a single command just because it does
>>> something similar.
>>
>> How about making it a 'stageuser-undel'? The 'user-undel' moves
>> preserved user to active, so the 'stageuser-undel' would move preserved
>> to staged. The action is similar, but has slightly different specifics
>> (which attributes are preserved etc.), and for me the 'stageuser-undel'
>> feels more natural than 'user-undel --to-staged' since it's basically
>> the same as there is 'stageuser-add' for creating a staged user, not
>> 'user-add --to-staged'. It would be in the same style as all the other
>> commands concerning operations with users in staged container.
>
> Well, user-undel is the opposite of user-del, and stageuser-undel 
> should be the opposite of stageuser-del. The stageuser-undel you are 
> suggesting is not.
>
> Also I'm not sure if we want to (always) remove the deleted user once 
> a staged user is created from it, but -undel behaves like that.
>
> I don't think the command should be limited to deleted users only. 
> Active and deleted users share the same namespace, so it is an 
> arbitrary limitation.

preserved users has been valid active user. In that sense 
active/preserved are managed by a same set of CLI 
(user-find,user-del,user-show) because a preserved user is a 'user'. So 
I would vote for continuing with a 'user-*' commands and use 'user-undel 
--to-stage'.

>
> I think that what we are looking for is the opposite of 
> stageuser-activate. So maybe user-stage?