libXO-ification - Why - and is it a symptom of deeper issues?

[Dan Partelly]

It’s not about the fronted. That would have to be replaced most likely 
The most useful part IMO is the permission engine itself, and maybe some 
other parts too but without insight into implementation I am not able to 
judge that.  

You could IPC key value-data into the security engine describing arbitrary commands,
, have the request validated, user right checked, then passed to a command execution 
system (and I use the command  term very loosely, I do not refers to a
utility)  


> On 17 Nov 2015, at 18:42, Simon J. Gerraty <sjg at juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> Dan Partelly <dan_partelly at rdsor.ro> wrote:
>>  Juniper can further help FreeBSD by donating the code of their
>>  system management daemon and their fine granularity permissions
> 
> At the cost of i18n etc?
> The Junos UI is totally data driven, syntax is verified term by term
> (since depending on your permissions some terms simply do not exist for
> you).   Such a model cannot be successfully translated to other
> languages where the order of verbs and nouns differ for example.
> 
> Everything I've read on the topic suggests that messages must be
> translated on at least phrase if not sentence granularity for reasonable
> results, and that just doesn't fit our UI.
> Thus enhancement requests for i18n are politely rejected.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"