On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:11 PM, j. v. d. hoff <veedeeh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 19:37:35 +0100, Mike Meyer <m...@mired.org> wrote: > I'm just proposing to automate what you do manually in the considered > situation (including chosing a different local password, why not?): create > the user, make him the default, choose some (local) password. where'd be the > problem?
Well, for one, it's a violation of what POLS means (as opposed to simply "I was surprised"). POLS means that you can correctly extrapolate how the software will behave in some situation by observing how it behaves in other situations. Fossil always uses the current login name as the default user name when a repo is created (whether by cloning or ab initio). Since that's the only observed behavior, doing that in one particular instance can't be a violation of POLS. In fact, if fossil were to change so that some particular case the default user name were something else, that would be a violation of POLS. And as I said, just setting the user name doesn't buy anything. Either it's a clone that's not going to have a password, in which case the default user name is already what I want it to be, or it's going to need a password, in which case I have to issue one command whether the user exists or not. I don't believe that this change would buy anything, much less enough to warrant the violation of POLS that it calls for. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
