On Thu, 24 Apr 2025, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 12:01:45PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
"The added group will not be visible in current user sessions"
There will be a bug report "please make added groups visible in current user
sessions" since this sentence suggests that it's a design decision in
adduser.
Is that an acceptable compromise between "the user is left completely in
the dark" and "maintaining additional words adds too much of a workload"?
"Leaving people in the dark" is suggesting that the adduser maintainers act
in bad faith. We Don't.
Is there a desire to improve the situation for the user or is there not?
Because if there is no desire to improve the situtation for the user then
there is no point discussing semantics of words. This discussion has been
going on for a dozen of posts with me trying to improve the situtation of
the `adduser` user but I have yet to see a constructive reply from you
Marc - constructive in the sense "yes this is a problem and yes I want to
improve the life of an `adduser` user".
So if there's no desire to improve the adduser manpage or adduser with
respect to the problem at hand then there's no point in spending time
discussing it, or am I misunderstanding something?
I do understand your concern Marc, that any byte published is a byte that
needs to be maintained. But if that is the argument that tops all the
others then no change is possible.
Again: if there's no will to change anything and if that is the top
argument then there's no point in further discussion.
*t
