more virtual domain funnyness

[Igor Brezac]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Kendrick Vargas wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Rob Siemborski wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Kendrick Vargas wrote:
> >
> > > I c... so that means that global admins have to have unqualified
> > > usernames, which are then qualified with the default domain? If that's the
> > > case, then global admins can only come from the defaultdomain? That seems
> > > kinda.. well, dumb. Why not just have a seperate admins line specifically
> > > for global admins?
> >
> > Why does it matter?  Admin accounts aren't real accounts anyway -- they
> > shouldn't be recieving mail, in any case.
> >
> > I'm personally against the use of a global admins option unless there is
> > some significant technical advantage gained.
>
> Well, the only real advantage (for me) for a global admin is that I have
> one account I use from my server side web scripts to manage all of the
> accounts. I can handle the per domain permissions and stuff like that
> outside of cyrus and just use the global administrative account as the
> backend access for my web scripts.
>

If this is the case, then cyrus does what you need.  Please see my
previous message for guidelines on how to setup global admins.

> I actually personally don't care what username I use to get it, but I
> don't think it should go missing. It just feels a little confusing and
> unclear why things are tied together the way they are.

Perhaps.  But this is what most of the list wanted when Ken wrote the
code.

-- 
Igor