-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/2010 03:57 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:30:17 +0100
Sumit Bose <sbose(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:21:20AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:13:57 +0100
>> Sumit Bose <sbose(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I would return true here. Then the user can still be deleted with
>>> --force, but the admin will know that he has to be careful on this
>>> plattform.
>>
>> Sumit,
>> I disagree, it would require --force for any delete, looks like
>> too much.
>>
>
> Only on plattforms where the check is not implemented. I think people
> will expect a warning if the user is logged in, so it is an unexpected
> behaviour if I can delete a user who is logged in without --force.
If the check is not implemented you have no way to know, so you would
always return a warning even when there is no reason. This would make
an habbit to use --force without even thinking about it. So if later on
the platform gets a method it will never be used.
I agree with checks on platfroms where we can determine if a user is
logged or not, but always requiring --force on platforms that do not
have a way to check seem basically useless and badly educates the admin.
IMO.
Simo.
What about issuing a warning and then proceeding with the delete?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkujkb0ACgkQHsardTLnvCW24ACg2z/IMz+pLlHk1mTUxNNH4I0x
VFoAoL0GmaeSDC9uibu9nI08TZ9EmjIE
=Z/xu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----