From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DA75138334 for ; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 16:29:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5BC49E086E; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 16:29:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07C1BE0867 for ; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 16:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (d202-252.icpnet.pl [109.173.202.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF97534574A; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 16:29:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <9cbfa8e589153ec658ba54b44079be2d6beecbd2.camel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] glep-xxxx: User and group management via dedicated packages From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 18:29:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20190605091839.17396-1-mgorny@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-aN4NZ2Turblg8sGvxAmz" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: ff1b5d28-5729-49be-b992-8c733592c489 X-Archives-Hash: f7031aa00710dcd431786af15be5e274 --=-aN4NZ2Turblg8sGvxAmz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2019-06-05 at 12:15 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > Should we require a mailing list review for new user/group packages? >=20 > It's difficult to modify a user once you've settled on a UID, home > directory, and shell; so it pays to get things right the first time. Sounds like a good idea. I'll keep in mind for the next iteration of this GLEP. > The need is more apparent with fixed UIDs: if a popular package "steals" > a UID that some other package needs, then that other package is going to > be difficult or impossible to install (especially if it ultimately > depends on the popular package). >=20 > A mailing list review could elicit a "hey, my package NEEDS that UID, > and yours doesn't care" before it's too late. I've already seen a major issue today: we have multiple packages using 'git' user and requiring different setup for it (e.g. home directory).=20 This is already a big problem, and having proper review should decrease the chance of things like this happening again. And yes, we will need to figure out a good solution once we start porting users. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --=-aN4NZ2Turblg8sGvxAmz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGTBAABCgB9FiEEx2qEUJQJjSjMiybFY5ra4jKeJA4FAlz37e1fFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEM3 NkE4NDUwOTQwOThEMjhDQzhCMjZDNTYzOUFEQUUyMzI5RTI0MEUACgkQY5ra4jKe JA5SJAf/cs7yPTr4fdm8ilvslRgh/v2WxqUU9KVhs/Ghsn7efxkLOPy5Fep/JSrp gBXTEcqORNCbBVhZH2/aft4Ye6MYMVnd5weCtpi0yvTSiA676qz9v9tXZNV7g1c3 BpUI4wMf6OnL8YEFXhrFiul5p0yoo7V7UmD0TeC2XztsWj7rCoEs00DQ3Sg0VeNK /yjea4C4sratHKUvh7TstVswRFUw40SlRMMtNMcluozGU46MzheJ+4aKQkENCfin rGWGbDgXowJEZncFDyuflQ2Qop441iJIPMbSK5xR7uebfb+Wr0AbS3Z4YwseEqcC 4jQcurefxjJV4nClbEITpQJNkicfrA== =+G5K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-aN4NZ2Turblg8sGvxAmz--