On Dec 7, 2007, at 3:52 PM, Brian Moseley wrote:
it seems that many people who are already adopting Cosmo aren't satisfied with ticket-based sharing but rather want to set permissions on a per-user or per-group basis. some of our most vocal recent users are using Cosmo in an office environment that is less casual than a family or book club. I would really appreciate a firm statement one way or another on whether we're going to address this issue for 1.0. this will help me give a better answer every time somebody new asks me about the feature.
Access control stuff is in the bucket of stuff that falls onto my plate, which is why it didn't appear in Sheila's list. Supporting stronger than ticket access control is something that we will definitely address in the context of these milestones. There's still some work to do to clarify the milestones in the list, so I can't tell you which milestone we will target, but by the time we are done with that list we will have per-user/group security. Randy has already been looking at how to address some of the technical issues that we will face in trying to implement a better security model. I'd encourage people to follow the work that he is doing (via the cosmo-dev list). We are also going to have UI level issues that need to be addressed.
I also don't see anything about scheduling in this plan. after the last on-site staff meeting and subsequent talks with various managers, I had the impression that we were going to give serious consideration to scheduling features. that's the last I heard on the subject. what happened?
I'm going to let Katie explain the various options for scheduling. Ted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
