Code review comment for lp:~hazmat/pyjuju/states-with-principals

> On 2012/04/04 15:53:23, hazmat wrote:
> > It seems to be the number one concern regarding the failed MIR.
>
> My understanding is that the MIR has been dropped.
>

hence the term 'failed'

> > The implementation here is per the security spec discussed last fall,
> > incorporating feedback from the initial reviews. The spec is out of
> date
> > (uses ensemble instead of juju), and per feedback the OTP agent was
> dropped
> > for interceptable OTP tokens.
>
> > There aren't any public interface changes, just the imposition of ACLs
> onto
> > existing nodes.
>
> Please see the mailing list conversation about what "public changes"
> means. The message subject is "Code reviews and public API changes".

>
> > I can update the spec and send it around to the list if you'd like..
> but as
> > is, the components can effectively be merged as the default security
> > policy is permissive, ie no functional delta till the policy is
> activated.
>
> The management of the Python code base is under your control, as we
> agreed. What I'm concerned about is with changes that are landing
> without being debated for 12.04 (hint: we *are* in 04!).

ic. we've publicly debated these changes previously last fall, i believe your saying that that process needs to be done again?