Hi Jacob, Jacob First <jacob.fi...@member.fsf.org> skribis:
> Thanks for the explanation. This rationale sounds reasonable to me. If > someone with proper permission has modified a user account's comment, > it could be important to preserve that customization. > > As I pointed out in an earlier message, I believe this behavior > contradicts the documentation of the `user-account' data type pretty > strongly. So it appears there is at least a "doc bug" here. > > FWIW, I actually reported the present behavior as a bug not because of > the doc issue, but based on an assumption that "purely declarative" > implied the result of applying a given configuration should not depend > on any preexisting system state like a user comment. Sorry for not > making that clear: it seemed obvious, but I think it's actually a > misconception (even if user accounts are one of the few areas, AFAICT, > where the property doesn't hold true). I clarified this and ensures ‘chfn’ is actually usable in commit c76775263e56a10cc1b84d03a5827f42436afe40. Thanks! Ludo’.
