SQL usergroup table

[Guy Fraser]

On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 10:28 -0400, Alan DeKok wrote:
> Peter Nixon <listuser at peternixon.net> wrote:
> > Is there any reason why the "usergroup" table is not calle d"radgroup" by
> > default to fit with the other radius tables?
> 
>   No idea.  Let's try to be consistent in 2.0.
> 
Is it not because it maps users to groups ?

"radgroup" could refer to any kind of group association but 
I can't think of any reason why it couldn't be changed, 
except that a note in really large letters should be put on 
the download page to ensure administrators don't get miffed 
when upgrading, and possibly getting bitten by the change.