Subject: bug#63082: [PATCH v3 05/16] services: mpd: Obsolete the 'group' field.

From: Liliana Marie Prikler <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 May 2023 21:51:59 +0200

Am Freitag, dem 05.05.2023 um 14:29 -0400 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
> Prior to this change, there was a discrepancy where a user could have
> disagreeing groups between the group and user fields (the user field
> being a <user-account> record, which includes its primary group as a
> string).  This could have caused problems because the USER's group
> was being used to set the file permissions, while the GROUP name was
> serialized to MPD's configuration, and MPD would use it to set the
> group of its running process.  
Didn't we agree in v2 that we want to address this on the account-
service level?  Unless the rest of this series somehow depends on this
patch, I'd rather delay it until we have a proper solution.

> Synchronizing both is not practical, as it can easily lead to
> slightly different <user-account> objects conflicting, again causing
> problems.
It might not be practical to do so inside the service, but note how
this has already become an effort in defensive programming.  There are
easier ways to not make this a problem on the configuration level,
namely by specifying the same group for both user and group fields.  As
far as I see this is even the default state of being if the user is
supplied as a string.

Cheers