I was playing with the latest 2.1 nightly build and have a couple of questions.

1. What will happen with users who currently have the same real name during an upgrade from 2.0 to 2.2? I for example have at least 7 Erins...

2. Will a mechanism to deal with users whose Real name field was left blank be available? Again keeping in mind the upgrade from 2.0 to 2.2.

3. Webmasters are not able to see the username of a user when visiting a the user's profile page. I think this info should be available to webmasters. I would like also to assign this right to some groups in my site.

4. Will the following prefernces continue to exist in 2.2: 'Allow new user registration?', 'Allow users to change email address?', 'Select activation type of newly registered users'? I'm not able to find them now... but maybe I'm not looking at the right places. :)

1. only usernames are affected by being the same..

it makes no difference what the users real name is.. so no, there will not be a problem.

2. i should think so, i dunno how they working it.. maybe if real name is not given, username is used instead.. but it's not hard to make real name a required field..

3. that wouldn't be too difficult to do either.. probably as a hack.

4. i should think they are.. the admin area has been changed round, so the options will be in different places i assume.. but the enable new registrations is definitely there..

1. But I actually can't allow all of the 7 Erin's posting comments, etc. under the name Erin. I hope I'm saying it more clearly this time.

3. I suppose this could be made as a hack too. But I think this should be part of the core. Or the user management would be quite hard. In the long run webmasters and mods in a community would start forgetting whom warning notes were sent, who tends to misbehave, etc. if those users change their usernames constantly. I think this option would make keeping track of users easier.

1. i think you may have discovered a bug then or something that may have been overlooked when developing.. hopefully a dev could confirm that or not.

3.. point taken