OK, we have enough votes to keep the existing behavior, unless Marc appears and says he doesn't like it. ;-)
Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rod Taylor wrote: > It should also be noted that it's easy to get the DBAs to change their > username in the future when / if the @ hack goes away BUT it will be > difficult to change the usernames of the hundreds to thousands of > customer accounts. > > For an upgrade, we'd end up making a script in the upgrade to keep them > the same (with the @) then have a control panel code in place to suggest > to the user that they may stop using the @ if they wish <click here> > type of thing. > > > > > > > Tom likes this because it is the fewer global users who have to append > > > > > the '@'. > > > > > > At least that was my perception of the uneasy consensus reached. > > > > > OK, you have now split the vote because we have two for the change, and > > > two against. Why do you prefer to tag the globals? Is it Tom's > > > argument? I think it is kind of strange to tag the globals when it is > > > the locals who have @ in their username, and when they do: > > > In the case of a virtual hosting postmaster, global users would likely be > > DBA's, although they might not be. These users are going to be the > > exception, not the rule -- thus a character to tag their 'exceptional' > > nature. > > > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
