On Jul 28, 2015 6:07 PM, "Kevin Fenzi" <kevin@scrye.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 17:39:55 -0500 (CDT)
> Michael Hennebry <hennebry@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote:
> > > The above is stuff thats all being worked on, yelling at anyone is
> > > unlikely to change the speed at which it gets done.
> >
> > What does "worked on" mean?
> I have been talking with pam, libpwquality, anaconda,
> gnome-initial-setup and passwd maintainers to come up with a technical
> way to implement a default policy. As well as a way to override it for
> local users or products that wish a different policy.
> I have been spending a bunch of time exchanging emails, looking at
> libpwquality code and working out something everyone can implement.
> > It seem to me that that is precisely the issue.
> > It could mean fixing the problem.
> > It could mean setting it in stone.
> >
> > My expectation, and I think that of others,
> > is that for anaconda, it will be set in stone.
> What does 'set in stone mean'? The current behavior?
> No. The proposed policy (which I just submitted to fesco for approval)
> wouldn't be the same as the current anaconda behavior.
> ...snip...
> > How is a maintainer or a standard writer suppose to distinguish
> > patience-based silence from approval-based silence?
> When a maintainer or standard writer says: "We are working on this,
> please hang on" and you wait that is patience. When you say "NO! I am
> filing bugs and complaining instead" thats anoying.
> > Is there currently any reason to suppose that from now on
> > anaconda will not enforce its notion of strong passwords?
> Yes, because there will be a distro wide policy that anaconda (and
> other local password changing things) will follow.
> > In case the current work includes the setting in
> > stone of anaconda's demand for "strong" passwords,
> > what can or should those who prefer
> > encouragement to enforcement do about it?
> Well, I would personally say you should wait until there was a proposed
> policy to look at. Now there is:
> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1455#comment:30
> Feel free to comment there or in the fesco meeting tomorrow.
> If there's a great deal of problem with it we could also push it back
> to a discussion on the devel list.
> The frustrating thing for me here is that I have been working on this
> (as my other piles of tasks permit) for a while now and then people come
> along and start yelling that it's not changed yet, and tell me that
> they refuse to wait until there's a proposal, they want to complain to
> anaconda folks now (who are also waiting until there's a fesco policy).
> I appreciate that this is a very hot button issue for some folks, and I
> also appreciate that you want a solution 2 weeks ago, but I'm doing the
> best I can here to move us all to a nice standard distro policy and we
> aren't even at alpha yet.
> kevin
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Thanks for working on this, Kevin.  Personal opinions aside, I know you're very thorough and dedicated, and it is appreciated wholeheartedly.