The system doesn't always work

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at
Sun Apr 23 07:52:56 UTC 2006

On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 01:54 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: 
> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 13:47 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > In the meantime, the Packaging Guidelines should be updated to clarify
> > when use of fedora-usermngt is warranted.  I realize there's some
> > controversy involved, so should FESCO get involved to officially
> > bless/veto the use of fedora-usermngt?
> Yes please. 
Well, though I'd appreciate a decision to remove fedora-usermngt, I
don't think such a decision would be helpful, because this isn't a
political issue to draw an arbitrary decision or to vote on, but a
controversial technical issue.

One party wants to make fedora-usermgnt mandatory, the other party
considers it script-kiddy crap".

I am a member of the latter party and would consider FESCO drawing a
decision "pro fedora-usermgnt" as a severe project leadership fault and
them abusing their "management powers" to overrule technical expertise.

> It seems absolutely insane to me to not have a set policy on
> something as important as this. Either we use fedora-usermgmt in all
> packages, or not at all. (Personally my vote's for merging the
> fedora-usermgmt functionality into adduser itself, as Jef recommended
> IIRC.)
This is completely different (and less controversial) topic. 


More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list