Timothy Brownawell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The file is considered to be
> in "blocks", which are one or more "[wildcard]" lines followed by one or
> more other lines, and matching blocks are processed independently and in
> order until a match (including "--all--") or "! --all--" is found, or
> EOF. And I actually didn't think to make it support comments.
Ah, this is a much clearer description.
> I thought it'd be useful to be able to refine permissions for more
> specific branch patterns (add these users, remove these other ones)
> without having to respecify everything. Perhaps there's a better way to
> distinguish between "set permissions to exactly this" and "permissions
> are like the parent branch's (or rather, next-most-specific matching
> pattern's) permissions, except with these differences"? ("! --all--"
> means "deny everyone who hasn't been permitted yet", or equivalently
> "set permissions to exactly this")
Generally speaking, for files that specify access control, I prefer
a simple and clear format. A format that is even obvious when you do
not know the semantics. So I rather respecify everything than being
clever and reuse settings.
In real life most access control lists use a format that is
too difficult for me ;-)
Wim Oudshoorn.
_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
