From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1613741764; bh=Crnm/rbE6UPi1aozy1K2H6A1U5NfEe0UmaZQpn79Kmw=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=QZciHojFqtefw2/SPeK2xnz1nae6kYSbTPFkd7koQ90KE8H4HdZCMovbNCfPTyW/S Xt4qG7BNRBNOmFEFGUGWbk8kPP4d6gAv+XRoX97M4drc5G8QCMlvwNcvVPMX/BuGHT fM395ZSlpj3Mkko49SAMNFrGbd9c/dCZV+mbOoVe5vFCjhUAUlYA4vcPeSbzvKMzMG CmJLCc3B15Va+pQfVpSehD/dAa1eA8T4NMcWwBeDYXV7LVc5STC3ICgKJ+kny0GPsn 1Z2TflGfMgC1pvbEG+cUJAWFARnKtxig2vXYjgPZjKEFpLIs7wtNmpEyM2FZDJRgFs 7mc+OXLg3eRNA== To: Gabriel Kerneis , galene@lists.galene.org In-Reply-To: <1411faaf-6e05-459c-8fc1-523647cfa885@www.fastmail.com> References: <878s7kl6zh.fsf@toke.dk> <8735xsl1mq.fsf@toke.dk> <87lfbk6x6w.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87zh00jjnz.fsf@toke.dk> <87h7m86w05.wl-jch@irif.fr> <1411faaf-6e05-459c-8fc1-523647cfa885@www.fastmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:36:03 +0100 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87wnv4ji2k.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-ID-Hash: CII3OJQSV2N7M3O6EQAPZXLVWEOI35ID X-Message-ID-Hash: CII3OJQSV2N7M3O6EQAPZXLVWEOI35ID X-MailFrom: toke@toke.dk X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.2 Precedence: list Subject: [Galene] Re: Is the passwd file still needed? List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Gal=C3=A8ne_videoconferencing_server_discussion_list?= Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: "Gabriel Kerneis" writes: > On Fri, 19 Feb 2021, at 14:13, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> > Well personally I can live without (4). The obvious answer that comes to >> > mind to implement it is user groups, though. >> >> I like the idea. But the term "group" is already taken. "Team"? >> "Clique"? "Cabal"? "Club"? > > If breaking changes are still possible, I'd go with "group" for this > concept, and "room" for the current groups. > > Otherwise, be explicit and go with "user_group". +1 (on both points) -Toke