[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freeradius-users
Subject:    AW: Freeradius 3.0.x and Python 3
From:       PENZ Robert <robert.penz () tirol ! gv ! at>
Date:       2019-10-21 13:41:53
Message-ID: c429559a67a84a15ac1989f5f07d5357 () TLREXCH2 ! tirol ! local
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi!

we'll test it and report back.

Regards,
Robert


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Freeradius-Users \
[mailto:freeradius-users-bounces+robert.penz=tirol.gv.at@lists.freeradius.org] Im \
                Auftrag von Alan DeKok
Gesendet: Montag, 21. Oktober 2019 13:28
An: FreeRadius users mailing list
Betreff: Re: Freeradius 3.0.x and Python 3

On Oct 21, 2019, at 1:58 AM, PENZ Robert <robert.penz@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> 
> With the end of this year Python 2 is no longer supported and a big project like \
> Freeradius has still no Python 3 binding in their current stable release. Looking \
> through Github I found someone that backported the python3 module to Freeradius \
> 3.0.x 
> https://github.com/foxpass/freeradius-server/compare/v3.0.x...foxpass:python3_for_30x
> 

  There are these things called "pull requests" which GitHub supports.  They allow \
people to contribute back to a project.  The issue is that some people don't really \
care to do that.

> Please integrate that into a 3.0.x release, so everyone can use Freeradius and \
> python and be still compliant. As we're a customer of Redhat and RHEL 8 is missing \
> the python module in RHEL 8, we've talked with them and they said that they can \
> only integrate the python3 binding if it's in the upstream release and not only a \
> patch by someone. 

  If only RedHat would share some of that sweet, sweet, support revenue.  But the \
multi-billion dollar company is to cheap to either do the work themselves, or to pay \
someone else to do it.

  Instead, they rely on you (the paying customer) to demand that we work for free.  \
It's a great business model for RedHat, but it makes me more cranky than normal.

  There is a PR requesting this, as you found.  It points to an old PR which wasn't \
integrated because it crashed the server.  And that's not allowed.

  I'm happy to add that module to v3, so long as someone opens a PR.  I would suggest \
*one* commit which is "add rlm_python3", instead of the ~40 commits going "fix this, \
oops, fix that" from the above link.

  While it's terrible to have *both* python2 and python3 modules in the server, I'm \
also wary of changing existing functionality.  The existing python2 module works, and \
people expect it to do what it does.  Changing its behaviour in the middle of a \
stable release is a bad thing.

  BUT, and this is a big BUT.  People have to test it to be sure that it works.  If \
YOU are willing to do some tests and report back, then it's MUCH more likely that we \
can integrate the module before 3.0.20 is released.

  What is NOT acceptable is for a multi-billion dollar company, and all of their \
customers to demand that we work for free, in order to keep them happy.  That's a \
hard "no".

  Alan DeKok.


-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html

-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]