On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Simo Sorce wrote: > >> On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 17:58 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: >> > Any package (whether new or an update) that adds/changes PolicyKit, >> > consolehelper, or PAM configuration, and anything that installs new >> > setuid/setgid executables, should require some additional third-party >> > review. Any significant changes that passes review should require some >> > minimum amount of advance notice and documentation on how to revert >> > (preferably in some common easy-to-find place in the wiki). >> > >> > Is this feasible? >> >> Looks like a very good idea to me. >> > > I think that's too subjective though. I'd be more in favor of a simple, > broad view of what the user should be able to do without root. It's > possible "install packages" would be on that list, it's possible not. > That way packages could ask themselves "does this break the policy?" If > it doesn't, great. If it does, time for a bug report. > > Better then a review process because then everyone would generally know > what to expect. > > -Mike > I agree. I think that's easier rather than trying to understand the specifics of each package. stahnma -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
