Hello, On Sat 09 Feb 2019 at 01:51PM +01, Guillem Jover wrote: > To that effect I sent a patch to adduser to allow these in #521883, > but it seems that's stuck. :/ > >> How do others deal with this problem? Could someone think of a viable >> approach on how to approach this from a policy side? > > Unfortunately, last time it looked like there was some push bach, due > to there not being a clear winner in "current" practice at the time > AFAIR. I think a way forward would be to get that adduser patch merged, > then keep promoting the underscore usage, and possibly try to switch > existing users to use that. ISTM to me we have a consensus, at least, that new packages with system users should use the underscore prefix convention. There isn't a consensus on what to do about old packages, but Policy can be written in such a way to refer only to new packages with system users. Ideally the adduser change would happen before we wrote this down in Policy, but since the adduser behaviour is easy to workaround (IIRC), it would not be required for it to happen first. -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature