Re: Username length limitation policy

Hash: SHA1

The following still stands:

cjcollier - Mon Feb 14 01:32 PM 2006 -0800
> I would like to hear discussion from gnome-infrastructure about
> whether 8-char usernames is an outmoded or useful anachronism.
> I would also like to be the first use case of longer-than-8-char
> usernames.  I am eager and happy to provide feedback to this list
> if and when I ever encounter problems with a longer-than-normal
> username.
> Cheers,
> C.J.

rossg - Tue Feb 14 08:03 PM 2006
> My personal POV is that I don't see any big reason why we couldn't
> entertain the idea of longer-than-8-char login names within reason
> - i.e. to perhaps 12 chars, but I would certainly recommend against
> the use of non-ASCII ones.

Does anyone hold a differing opinion to Ross's?  If so, can you please

>>> rossg - Sun Jan 29 22:04:06 2006]:
>>> Hi,
>>> There are a few good reasons for the 8-character restriction.
>>> In fact, one of the reasons is that it is *far more* scalable
>>> than longer logins.

Would someone provide us some other good reasons?  I am happy to forgo
the stability that an 8-char username provides in order to make longer
usernames equally stable in the future.  I have been using the
username 'cjcollier' since at least 1999/10/15:

Would someone please explain to us how the 8-character restriction
could be considered "far more" scalable than longer logins?

I have been using long usernames successfully other than the following:

1) the IRC username length limitations that were common prior to 1999,
now resolved
2) policy limitations on the part of Microsoft in 2004, not petitioned
3) policy limitations on the part of Amazon in 2004-2005, not petitioned
4) policy limitations on the part of GNOME, currently being petitioned

Despite the frustration caused by Microsoft and Amazon username
policies, I did not petition for policy change.  I did not feel as
though I was a member of either company due to my contractor status.
However, I feel very involved in GNOME and feel that I should voice my
opinion.  I have used GNOME since first I heard of it and have made
contributions to many components in the form of bug reports and patches.

rossg - Sun Jan 29 22:04:06 2006]:
>>> I looked to have the policy changed when I first started
>>> fielding accounts queries too, but I was quickly convinced by
>>> the rest of the team that sticking with an 8-character limit
>>> was best for now. Maybe that position has changed, I don't
>>> know.

Who should we ask in order to determine whether the position has
changed?  Who, in your experience, holds most strongly to this policy,
and why?  IMHO, there has not been a case made, other than
conventional wisdom, for holding to this policy.

rossg - Sun Jan 29 22:04:06 2006]:
>>> However, if you want a more in-depth discussion and public
>>> debate over the policy, please bring it up on
>>> 'gnome-infrastructure gnome org'.
Please let's continue this discussion and public debate.  I do not
believe that the policy has been defended properly.  I will continue
to petition this list  to consider alteration until the reason for the
policy has been made clear.

Thank you all for your time and willingness to discuss this topic.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]