On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:36:01AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 12:32:08PM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > >>FWIW I hate it, too, anyone here around with other feelings for that? > >>Maybe we're all "that guy" ;) > > > >Yes, I am *also* that guy. > > > >Can't we just have a Fedora project registry of assigned numbers and stick > >to it? > > Fact is: fedora-usermgmt solves a (nitch) problem, regardless of > whether folks agree with it's implementation. > > Imo, maintainers of epel packages, should be free to use it, if they > wish. It would be inappropriate, imo, to implement a blanket "no > fedora-usermngt" policy in epel, unless, of course, no maintainer for it > can be found for epel. Please no, it requires the admin's attention to setup some random space in his user uid/gid space, and if he misses it (who really cares about yet another package pulled in by yum install foo) or forgets this setup he runs into possible uid/gid conflcits between packages and users. We don't want that for Fedora and even less for RHEL. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpYhhvzJzTFa.pgp
Description: PGP signature