Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

skip whoami check in as command #471

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

abhishiv
Copy link

ref #470

@abhishiv abhishiv changed the title skip whoami check skip whoami check in as command Jul 30, 2019
@capistrano-bot
Copy link

2 Warnings
⚠️ There are code changes, but no corresponding tests. Please include tests if this PR introduces any modifications in behavior.
⚠️ Please update CHANGELOG.md with a description of your changes. If this PR is not a user-facing change (e.g. just refactoring), you can disregard this.

Here's an example of a CHANGELOG.md entry (place it immediately under the * Your contribution here! line):

* [#471](https://github.com/capistrano/sshkit/pull/471): skip whoami check in as command - [@abhishiv](https://github.com/abhishiv)

Generated by 🚫 Danger

@leehambley
Copy link
Member

Can you clarify exactly why you want to introduce this please?

Another configuration option also needs docs and an explanation of why this exists and why we might need it.

SSHKit has existed for six years without this bypass and only two people have ever raised issue with the way it is designed. (and I know for a fact that many people, my clients included) run Capistrano via SSHKit with restricted user accounts.

I'd love to understand more about your use-case before taking a general solution.

Thanks for taking the time to submit a PR.

@abhishiv
Copy link
Author

abhishiv commented Jul 30, 2019

Hey @leehambley

I think the issue is that many distributions(like ubuntu on scaleaway) come without sudo. Hence it requires first to install sudo using apt before you can use sshkit.

Hence I think it's make more sense to remove this check. Is there a specific rationale that you want to keep this check for?

@leehambley
Copy link
Member

Applied "stale" label, will close in a few weeks if still stale.

@abhishiv abhishiv closed this by deleting the head repository Nov 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants