Re: [Mldonkey-users] User Management in 2.03

[Sergio Bayarri Gausi]

Hello,

I agree with Martin: if this feature is implemented, the user should be
able to turn it off. But that's easy to do, and it's also quite evident.

> > So a multi-user system is needed. End of this point.
>
> i doubt that - im using mld for quite some time and it never came to
> my mind

I had always liked my sister to use my mldonkey client instead of running
emule on her side. But I don't like the idea of each of us being able to
cancel/commit/remove/screw up each other's downloads.

Now that the idea of multiuser has arised, I really think it would be the
solution.

> i didnt say that - read before repliying...i said everyone who *tells*
> other people he's downloading illegal stuff deserves that....and thats
> what you are doing: offering other people to download whatever using
> your computer - so you are responsible for that - you alone!

It's my *sister*. I guess I can trust her. On the other hand, she won't
download anything she isn't already downloading on her computer (running
emule in Windows).

We are not offering "other prople" to use our mldonkey client. We are
offering *trusted* people to use a shared ressource.

We would step in a legal discussion here, but it's the same thing when you
have a multiuser environment.

What about a Linux server, with multiple shell accounts. A machine in an
University, for example. Each user in that machine can download warez
(ftp, web, GiFT, ...), hack other systems, or even run his own mldonkey
client! If you are the system administrator of that machine, you are not
responsible for what your users are doing (without your knowledge). If
somethign goes wrong, and the FBI runs in, it's more likely that they will
trace which user made the bad thing(tm) and prosecute him, not you. That's
why logs/process accounting/ident/etc exist.

But, again, we are not offering this ressource to strangers (and if
someone does, it's his own problem, not mine, I'll only share it with my
sister). And, as you said, this feature should be turn on or off by the
user.

> And i think as this list is read by the developpers its the right
> point to discuss something like that. (i myself contributed some
> patches too with one already included in the source - im far away from
> calling myself a dev but as i sticked to mldonkey right from the
> beginning im concerned about this development of not concentrating on
> the real important things (downloading/uploading/server+client+source
> management) but working on fancy interfaces and mu-systems)

Again, I agree with Martin: this is not a *vital* feature, but it would be
a quite interesting (and useful) feature for a lot of people. If it can
replace a mldonkey+emule on two computers with the same internet
connection to a mldonkey-only on one computer, I'd happy :)

Greetings,

Sergio