Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature: allow to use cleartext passwords #61

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 22, 2016
Merged

Feature: allow to use cleartext passwords #61

merged 5 commits into from
Nov 22, 2016

Conversation

poikilotherm
Copy link
Contributor

Currently I manage local users with this puppet module. Recently I had the need to use cleartext passwords for such a user, as the password needed to be inserted into Samba users, too. As Samba does not use /etc/shadow passwords, I had to extend the module.

I would be glad if this would be merged into this great module.

Thanks,
Oliver

- Generating a hash salt when the user is created
- Adding a custom fact to retrieve the created hash on later runs
- Possibility to override the salt explicitly
- Changing spec tests accordingly
@deric
Copy link
Owner

deric commented Nov 22, 2016

Cool, looks good. Thanks a lot Oliver!

@deric deric merged commit 98375f5 into deric:master Nov 22, 2016
@deric deric added this to the 1.5 milestone Nov 22, 2016
@poikilotherm poikilotherm deleted the feature_enable_cleartext_pw branch November 23, 2016 09:06
@poikilotherm
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi Tomas,

any plans on when 1.5 will be released?
Would be great to use the upstream module again...

Cheers,
Oliver

@deric
Copy link
Owner

deric commented Nov 23, 2016

Hopefully soon, with the acceptance test I'm more confident that I'm not breaking any existing features. I guess today (at most tomorrow) I should release it.

deric added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 23, 2016
@deric
Copy link
Owner

deric commented Nov 23, 2016

@poikilotherm I'd like to merge this refactoring if possible. I've tried to simplify the code a bit and resolve long-term issues. According to test it looks good but still I'd like to verify it :)

@poikilotherm
Copy link
Contributor Author

@deric In your comparison commit 815c73b is missing, right?

@deric
Copy link
Owner

deric commented Dec 5, 2016

@poikilotherm v1.5.0 released.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants