launchpad-dev team mailing list archive
-
launchpad-dev team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #06667
Re: Packaging permissions redux
-
To:
launchpad-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
From:
"Francis J. Lacoste" <francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
-
Date:
Wed, 9 Mar 2011 10:26:27 -0500
-
In-reply-to:
<AANLkTinfKgOrfrp225VpUDQO+yz=wEDta6RnTcNcjO-O@mail.gmail.com>
-
Organization:
Canonical Ltd.
-
User-agent:
KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.32-29-generic; KDE/4.5.3; x86_64; ; )
On March 8, 2011, Deryck Hodge wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Aaron Bentley <aaron@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > So "people set bad links regularly" means we have the first part
> > "packaging link", regularly. The second part "translations enabled
> > upstream" should be common if the feature we're working on is
> > successful. In the absence of hard data, the last part, "a potemplate
> > with the same name on both sides" seems rare, but not so rare that we
> > should ignore it. If necessary, we could query the database to find out
> > more.
>
> Yeah, this sounds reasonable. At least to know for sure what we're
> dealing with. If we're not going to cause much of an issue anyway and
> the condition exists infrequently, then we could avoid creating this
> barrier until we really see the need for it.
>
> Just my $.02. I certainly defer to the better judgement of the group on
> this.
I'll add my $.02CAN to yours!
Launchpad doesn't really need more confusing permission.
On the other hand, what about a malicious user removing packaging link on
Ubuntu main packages?
--
Francis J. Lacoste
francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Follow ups
References