with or without fedora-usermgmt

[Jarod Wilson]

Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:43:51AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>> Don't you think somebody should make some decision here:
>>> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-March/msg00124.html
>>> - flame, but possible pros and cons can be find there
>>> My opinion is not to use fedora-usermgmt.
>> My proposal is to use 100-499 for static as well, and just do static
>> registrations for everything - it's simpler. It can be combined with
>> making dynamic system IDs  go from 499 down as well.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Further, I think we should exercise a little caution with the < 100
> assignments and only fill that space with things that have a proven track
> record and are likely to be around and useful for a while. Not, say, random
> games.

+1.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jwilson at redhat.com


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070314/7fd428ad/attachment.sig>