Mike McGrath wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
You're now the second person on related threads to claim real problems
exist. I'm curious, what are they?
I'll give you 3
1) It doesn't work in epel
2) It ties us to something proprietary. No one else uses it, even dists
that are downstream from us remove it, which is embarrassing if nothing
else.
3) It's not universal, only some packages use it, some don't. So only
some of the use cases for some of the packages are covered.
OK, I guess my definition of "real problems" is different than yours.
Mine is: it's broken and doesn't work.
Other than 1 (which can potentially be fixed/worked-around), the rest
are comments around the idea that fedora-usermgmt may not be the *ideal*
solution. And I agree it's not ideal.
What I disagree with is the notion that fedora-usermnmt be rejected
before a better, working solution is ready to take its place(1).
-- Rex
(1) This is frustrating to me a bit lately on a wider variety of
subjects, when *working* solutions are rejected because they are
less-than-ideal or not perfect. This leads to great debates and
discourse, which more often than not, results in no consensus or
definitive right answers. In the meantime, months go by... and that
just plain sucks, big time.
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
