anonym wrote (12 May 2014 15:02:45 GMT) : > That makes a lot of sense in t-p-s since we *force* the persistent > container to be encrypted with a password. But for the Greeter's > *optional* admin password I'm note sure it makes sense.
I don't think it makes any sense. Sorry, I'm probably the one who wrote a misleading (not to say: stupid) description on this ticket. > IMHO this change is a severe loss of functionality, and either: > 1. we have to admit that requesting this was a mistake, and keep the > current behaviour. As far as "can't be empty" is concerned, right, we should keep the current behaviour. > 3. I've completely misunderstand what the ticket asks for. I believe it > was you, intrigeri, who filed the ticket (before it was imported to > redmine). Could you please elaborate on the purpose and arguments > for this change, if this is what you actually intended? The rest of the suggested changes make sense to me. The t-p-s UI is way nicer, with a nice little warning dynamically updated as long as entered password confirmation does not match. And I stole it from GNOME Disks, iirc, which makes the UX more consistent. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.
