On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 08:20 -0400, Olemis Lang wrote: > There is a previous discussion about this subject and also about «Why > not consider IDs instead of user name ?». JFYI, the advantage of the > later approach is that people like you would be able to change user > name in a single place and the change will be immediately > automatically propagated everywhere the ID is included ... but that's > not gonna happen (in a near future :( AFAICR )
A numeric ID would be nice. But, as that is not in the current setup, it won't help :) I would imagine that a method to convert pre-user-id setups to one that uses a user id would have to be part of the implementation. Perhaps that is the real stumbling block, more than the user ID implementation itself. > AFAICR somebody there mentioned a script that might be helpful for you > . IMO , if I were to face such a situation, I'd try to consider > something like implementing user aliases , so as to bind old user to > the new user, or any other approach that would allow me to leave > things just the way they were before . I try to avoid this kind of > migrations 'cause they've always been traumatic for me . However, I > suppose it's not a simple task . I suspect it is indeed not a simple task. > So if it's an urgent task , I suggest you to look for the script ;o) I do not know when the change will happen. It is some time in the future. I think that the organization in general has found that there are problems with changing the user names. But I understand that they will proceed anyway. I will have to search the google archives for the script. Any idea when it was discussed? -- Roger Oberholtzer -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-users?hl=en.
