Talk:Root Policy
From eg
Contents |
[edit] Follow protocol
If a policy will be set in stone at some upcoming meeting, but sure to add a notice to that effect. After the meeting, document the fact that the policy was set at that meeting, linking back to its minutes (the same designator as the agenda, deliberately).
That way, anyone who objects to the policy knows it's coming up for debate, and anyone who challenges it can instantly find the minutes of the deciding meeting.
e.g.:
Even if sysop meeting 2005-12-12 is just to rubber-stamp Root Policy it is still a good idea to put all the appropriate notices up as if it is really up for real debate. This builds good habits and establishes at least narrow windows of objection one can point back at later to say "you had your chance".
[edit] Record settled issues on this page
- New notice now indicates there is some discussion about root stuff at all sysop issues, though the issue now seems decided. Those who only want to read current policy (actual decisions) can/should just ignore it and read the standing Root Policy as it is. Those who want to argue about it can go to the issue page and participate. If there's a meeting specifically about root policy again, link that meeting again.
- When anyone decides all Root Policy issues are totally settled, the notice should be changed to something like:
- There is no present issue with this policy. Raise one at all sysop issues, if you wish to propose alternatives or better solutions. To simply discuss the consequences of the policy, edit Talk:Root Policy .
[edit] Settled issues regarding Root Policy
These should be removed from all issues and from all sysop issues. They are recorded here in case anyone wishes to discuss or debate them out of process. If required this can move to Root Policy/done or such a page.
[edit] log root using sudo?
- position: "& we want a record of what was done to the system; nostriluu: handle multiple root users", on-agenda sysop meeting 2005-12-12: "use su for everythings and archive root's bash history... give them a user account that's allowed to "sudo shutdown" but not "sudo vim",
- argument for: sudo won't ask for a reason: "you can either sudo for a one line command, or sudo to the shared admin session"
- position: if there are so many people using root casually it's better to divide functions onto multiple hosts with clearer lines of responsibility
- argument against: if it's easy to do with sudo, do it
