Sorry if some of my questions are a little dense. Hopefully
this makes sense.
On Wed 15 Jul 2009 at 08:57PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> * Enablement of administrators and users to restrict what packages
A grammar nit: "Enablement of" is somewhat stilted. "Enable
[administrators|package creators]" works just as well.
Can we give some guidance that this is to be avoided if at all
possible, due to problems with user dissatisfaction? I know I
will be dissatisfied if I have to watch reams of "must-display"
licenses go by. It would also be nice to give guidance that
this is not a place for advertising, documentation, READMEs,
HOWTOs, etc.
> To enable administrators and users to effectively manage the
> packages contained within an image, users need to be able to
> define, on a per-publisher basis, what the behaviour of the
> packaging system and clients should be in the following key
> areas related to licenses:
>
> * filtering
>
> Administrators and users need to be able to define a policy
> that can be used to determine what packages are delivered into
> an image based on licensing information defined in packages.
I believe you that someone might need this, but I have never needed
the ability to accept or reject packages based on their license.
> license-accept A list of values that will be used to mark any
> license with a matching description or class as
> accepted automatically if they require acceptance.
> This value is undefined by default.
Can this be set by the user to "all"?
> 5. cli
>
> 5.1. pkg(1)
>
> The pkg(1) client that pkg(5) provides needs to be enhanced to
> provide the following functionality:
>
>
> * A mechanism to temporarily override client behaviour, provide
> intial policy values during image-creation, or to provide
> explicit user intent (such as license acceptance).
>
> A new command-line option as shown below will be added to the
> pkg(1) client that will allow its usage with applicable sub-
> commands. Policy names not applicable to the corresponding
> subcommand will effectively be ignored (such as pursue-latest
> with the 'fix' subcommand).
>
> --policy <policy-name>=<policy-value>
To be clear, what is the syntax for multiple policy settings?
I presume it's to specify --policy multiple times.
> The following packages contain licenses that require
> acceptance before they can be installed (use --policy
> license-policy=accept to accept these licenses):
(should we have --accept as a shortcut for this?)
Can a copyright be marked "must-accept"?
Will the user's PAGER be employed at any time? What happens if the
license is many pages long? Use of PAGER might allow the license to be
displayed in the "alternate" screen, which would be nice for information
flow.
In the same vein, I was also surprised that there was not a "prompt"
option available; it seems to me relatively natural for a user to want
to just be prompted along the way for accepting licenses-- more natural
than having to reinvoke the command with a new option. I don't know
if that should be the default, but it seems relatively benign to me if
it's an option.
-dp
--
Daniel Price, Solaris Kernel Engineering http://blogs.sun.com/dp
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
