This probably is nit-picking, but it interests me in terms of how the
language is used and understood.
On 06/19/2013 08:55 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I believe it actually can. The error message that is returned for a bad
> password, bad user or expired password is all the same. Which is why I
> put the username in there.
Sure, the authentication can fail for all these reasons. What I stumbled
over was the formulation of a "failed username". If an engine fails, it
might literally fall apart. The username itself - even if it doesn't
pass authentication - is not falling apart in the same sense. But does
the username (or the password) fail if authentication with it (in
combination with password and account expiration time) is not possible?
After all, it might still a valid and complete username for another
cluster or another service.
You can probably say: "that username failed" when you actually mean it
"failed to authenticate together with the provided password". Or how do
English native speakers perceive this?
> "Authentication failed or password has expired for user \"%s\""
>
> Authentication failed covers any combination of a username/password
> being wrong and obviously password expired covers the other.
Works for me. Considering the password to be the thing that expires
(rather than the account) is probably more accurate as well.
Regards
Markus Wanner
