-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 09/29/2010 01:02 AM, Jeff Schroeder wrote:
Not for the sake of being argumentative, but for the sake of
completeness, why do you want to change the semantics of what an admin
would expect? Especially when most people using sssd are former
pam_ldap users and expect things like netgroups to work a certain way?
While not disagreeing, I'm just curious as to the reasoning.
Is that behaviour used in the field, though? In what scenario? (I'm not
a sysadmin, so these are genuine questions..)
FWIW, my personal opinion is similar to Dmitri's - implement just #2 for
now as it sounds like a much better solution from engineering
perspective and add a compatibility mode if needed in a later release if
someone asks for it. That way we get coverage for 99% of the cases now
and we'll see if we need to worry about the compatibility mode at all.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----