On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 10:46 -0300, Davidson Rodrigues Paulo wrote:
Yes, but we [the developers] are the minority. We never can forget
If Fedora is catering to contributors, then there is that consideration.
Furthermore, some security aspects aren't merely "Point'n Click." As
someone who has done policies & procedures for banks, forcing people to
use a process is not optional, and I don't know how many times I caught
key people giving out or assuming authentications were actual, when they
Right, this is part of the Free Software philosophy, that is,
things the way you want", not "I don't care if there is another way to
do that, do it the way I did".
I'm not seeing your point there. My apologies if I'm assuming here.
There is a reason why there is _always_ a "command line interface" (CLI)
to every program, it's the "most common denominator." Graphical user
interfaces (GUI) should never cross CLI interfaces, _only_ complement.
The GNU project and standards has drastically improved these standards
over previous UNIX efforts. And there are reasons why the system may
need to be configurable outside the GUI as well. ;)
As an original NT 3.1 beta tester through today as a person who
regularly "retrains" (i.e., "deprograms") Windows sysadmins to
multiuser, think piecemeal, think security" like UNIX/Linux, I have
volumes on what NT absolutely screws up on and lacks standards when it
comes to this -- often to the ultimate demise of Microsoft Professionals
who, eventually, do not tolerate it.
I'm not sure if this can be considered a bug because both
signature verification works as they were programmed to. I think this
is an issue for a feature request, not a bug report. Anyway, I'll send
a report using this channel (unless exists another more appropriate),
because just talking helps nobody.
Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance
Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution