On Wed, 13.02.08 16:12, Les Mikesell (lesmikesell(a)gmail.com) wrote:
> As we get more familiar with making HAL/CK policy edits, these
sorts
> of questions will lose meaning. HAL/CK policies can and will be
> customized away from the default set of rules written with a shared
> desktop in mind. There's no technical reason that a music server
> daemon package for example couldn't drop in new policy that changed
> the behavior here. We just have to understand how to write that
> policy file and then agree that's the sort of thing we want server
> packages to do on install.
I'm not convinced that anyone can deduce the behavior I want from the
packages that are installed. Or even that I'd know for sure myself ahead
of time in all cases but I have a hard time imagining a case where I'd want
access cut off to an existing, running session just because someone else
might want to check their email on a different account and they do it from
a VT instead of Xnest. Is it possible to make the rules easy to manage
locally - and can you have a first-served wins rule?
We had exactly the same discussion already on this ML. Please consult
the archives, instead of decreasing the signal-to-noise ration of this ml
even further.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553
http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4