> I find this wording weird... I seriously doubt we should consider > "pkexec" legacy. It's the much nicer approach to the "sudo" > problem, > as mentioned in earlier discussions... > > Splitting it off into a separate package might be OK, but claiming > that the fact that it is a suid binary makes it "legacy" sounds really > strange to me, by that means we should also mark "sudo", "su", > "ping", > "mount", "umount", "write", "passwd", … and so on > "legacy", but I > doubt we are at that point, are we? > > hence I am not against the feature but please tone down the wording > regarding pkexec, it's misleading. Say you want to split it out to > reduce the attack surface, but don't use the word "legacy" in its > context. > > (dropping "pkla-compat" given its unmaintained state is Ok to be > called "legacy" i guess)
I agree that the wording is stronger than it should be. I'll update that. -- Timothée Ravier CoreOS engineer & Fedora Kinoite maintainer _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
