On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:32:56 -0500, David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hubert Chan wrote: >> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 02:01:12 -0400, Kyle Moffett >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >>> I don't deny them the right to add other interfaces later, but such >>> should be a secondary or tertiary patch, after the rest of the stuff >>> is in. In any case, if we were to provide an interface by which one >>> could $EDITOR the POSIX ACLs, it should be done in the VFS where all >>> filesystems can share it. >> I don't know if VFS is the right place for it, but I agree that it >> would be good to make it accessible to all filesystems. Sorry, "accessible to all filesystems" is incorrect terminology (it's backwards). What I meant was something more like "able to access extended data from all filesystems". But I think everyone understands what I meant. > You put it in /meta, which is available to all filesystems. >> Looking forward to the flamewar that happens when Namesys decides >> that file-as-dir is ready to be turned on again. ;-) > Namesys still hasn't commented directly on the /meta proposal, have > they? That would avoid the flamewar altogether. Well, we could still have a flamewar about whether metafs is useful, what type of functionality it should provide, etc. I'm sure we could find something to argue about. ;-) >From a purely philosophical/aesthetic/theoretical point of view, I like file-as-dir much better than anything else, and would be ecstatic it if Namesys was able to make it work. From a practical/technical point of view, metafs may be an acceptable compromise. -- Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.
