Again? The password

[Scott Robbins]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 02:49:09PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:


> 
> Well, sure, thats the case in any open source project. 
> You as a user of that project are welcome to try and convince the
> people doing work to change things to what you desire. If you fail to
> do this, then it will not get done. After a decision has been made to
> you suppose more and more queries to change the decision will go well?
> 

Well, though I feel like a troll for being the one to raise this--and it's
also causing heated discussion on the CentOS list, that's the point.
Maybe, if they realize how many people it annoys, they'll drop it.  

Anyway, while an 8 character lowercase letter number combo was considered
too weak, sizematters was considered sufficient.  

I think, that like many other decisions disliked by the more experienced,
they're going to wind up doing it, and once again, a few people will, when
it goes into RHEL, be annoyed enough to leave, but not enough to really
affect their business--who wants to change the O/S on 100, or even 5,
servers?

I think that closing the two bug reports immediately was somewhat
premature.

> > 
> > Again, the issue was never "how fast are we getting a policy?".
> > The issue was always "what policy are we getting?".
> > 

Or perhaps, why are we suddenly instituting this policy? 

I believe that I used the analogy last time they tried, of the TSA.
It gives some appearance of security, does almost no good, and serves to
annoy the vast majority.



-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6