On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 06:00:32 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thats off the top of the head, and just the stuff I've had on hold
> for EAPI=1. Would expect user/group management (glep27 off the top
> of the head) would be on the radar also, although thats firmly in
> pioto's court.
Hmm, since I was mentioned here, I guess I'll respond.
My glep 27 implementation is essentially complete, though without
making some changes to PAM and shadow, it won't really function for
ROOT!=/ with a GNU userland. Because of this, I don't really deem it
ready for general use yet.
I want my final code to be complete and done in the correct way, so
rather than just having it hack away at ${ROOT}/etc/passwd and what
not, I want to take the time to patch PAM and shadow. This isn't
something I really have the time right now to dive into (I'm working 6
days a week), but I hope to have the time to dive into it in a few
more months when I leave my current job and go back to school.
----
Back on topic, though. I don't see how having this spec drafted in part
by non-developers is such an issue. The council doesn't have to accept
this document as official, and they can always request changes be made.
So, how does it matter if one of the people who has a strong interest
in writing this isn't currently a Gentoo developer? I'd say we should
be glad, since it means that developers can spend more time on their
other projects and not have to worry about doing the grunt work of
writing this spec. And, just because people are working on writing this
spec doesn't mean other folks can't go and write their own.
--
Mike Kelly
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
