Tyson Dowd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oops, forgot to mention that I don't know what SOL means, so I couldn't
answer that bit.
S**t Out of Luck is the normal definition. :)
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I guess this implies that the each user must have a login to the
database?
Correct. This is a requirement anyway to have complete, end-to-end
audit trails, and that's important.
There are other ways of doing this... If we have a "trusted security
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 08:58:59AM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I guess this implies that the each user must have a login to the
database?
Correct. This is a requirement anyway to have complete, end-to-end
audit trails, and that's important.
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was speaking only about the audit trail within the db itself. I
haven't given any thought to other auditing requirements.
Ok, so long as we don't require a specific database login for each
registered user, I'm ok with that. ;)
BTW, I think postgres
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:56:36AM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was speaking only about the audit trail within the db itself. I
haven't given any thought to other auditing requirements.
Ok, so long as we don't require a specific database login for
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, I checked, and it does support kerberos. See
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.0/postgres/c1688317027.htm
Thanks
You could create a role named for your wife and use that to achieve
the effect you want. But you say this is an
I wrote:
Put all entries into a single table (journal). Never delete or alter any
of them. Instead, add new correcting entries. This eliminates the need
for an audit table.
Dr. David C. Merrill write:
Sounds like an interesting idea. Can you elaborate?
I have a "correction_ref" field in
Christopher Browne writes:
Hmmm... If an "entry" is superceded, then we're left with two entries:
a) The original one, which is, in effect, no longer valid, and to which
nothing should, any longer, point.
b) The new one, superseding the original, to which everything should _now_
point.
It's been rumoured that Tyson Dowd said:
On 02-Jan-2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tyson,
Re:
It's been rumoured that Christopher Browne said:
CORBA Notification or Event services rather than changing GUIDs all the
time.
We also have Derek Atkin's
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:37:25AM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, I checked, and it does support kerberos. See
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.0/postgres/c1688317027.htm
Thanks
You could create a role named for your wife and use
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- a single table; no separate audit table.
- the client doesn't work directly with guids, but instead works with
an "ID" field that does not change when records are edited. The guid
stays globally unique. The client still has access to the guid, if
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because it is so much more manageable when you have sets of users who
all have the same permissions. Maybe that's not the situation I should
be optimizing, though.
When you have sets
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because it is so much more manageable when you have sets of users who
all have the same permissions. Maybe that's not the situation I should
be optimizing, though.
When you have sets of users, you create a group (role) and then acl
the group; then you
what SOL means,
shit -- outta luck.
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnumatic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
Ahhh. Pseudo-code is so much more precise than English can ever hope
to be. Thank you. I see now that you are including an additional level
of abstraction, by separating "group" from "role". My concept of
"role" is analagous to AclEntry, and I
David Merrill writes:
The major changes are:
- a single table; no separate audit table.
- the client doesn't work directly with guids, but instead works with
an "ID" field that does not change when records are edited. The guid
stays globally unique. The client still has access to the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:37:01AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
I wrote:
Put all entries into a single table (journal). Never delete or alter any
of them. Instead, add new correcting entries. This eliminates the need
for an audit table.
Dr. David C. Merrill write:
Sounds like an
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 08:36:48PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Allow me to poke my nose into this discussion as well, if that's OK.
There is a generalization of groups acl's called 'workflow'
that wouldn't be inappropriate for this system. I won't argue that
'it must be
It's been rumoured that Tyson Dowd said:
One of MS's aims was "no more IDL".
OK,
I think I got it now: viz. basically, a super-duper SWIG.
http://www.swig.org
The 'right thing' to do in the free software world would be to
write a module for SWIG that auto-generates SOAP schema
perform the
Hi,
I decided that the best way to cope with my previous problem was to
just use threads. So, I did, and it works (at least for me). It does
mean that any server we build will have to be somewhat thread-aware,
but that shouldn't be too hard.
Anyways, I've got a demo which you can download and
Hi all,
Allow me to poke my nose into this discussion as well, if that's OK.
There is a generalization of groups acl's called 'workflow'
that wouldn't be inappropriate for this system. I won't argue that
'it must be done', but would like to ask you to take a moment
understand what its
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 04:36:31PM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- a single table; no separate audit table.
- the client doesn't work directly with guids, but instead works with
an "ID" field that does not change when records are edited. The guid
Derek Atkins writes:
Hi,
I decided that the best way to cope with my previous problem was to
just use threads. So, I did, and it works (at least for me). It does
mean that any server we build will have to be somewhat thread-aware,
but that shouldn't be too hard.
Is that option 1a from
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:02:15PM -0800, Dave Peticolas wrote:
David Merrill writes:
The major changes are:
- a single table; no separate audit table.
- the client doesn't work directly with guids, but instead works with
an "ID" field that does not change when records are edited.
WRT the bug discussed on IRC where multiple report windows caused a
crash in Redhat (with guile 1.3.4), I can confirm the bug is
repeatable on Debian potato (also with guile 1.3.4).
Fun fun fun for everyone to debug :/
Robert Merkel
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 06:39:29PM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
Ahhh. Pseudo-code is so much more precise than English can ever hope
to be. Thank you. I see now that you are including an additional level
of abstraction, by separating
David Merrill writes:
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:02:15PM -0800, Dave Peticolas wrote:
David Merrill writes:
The major changes are:
- a single table; no separate audit table.
- the client doesn't work directly with guids, but instead works with
an "ID" field that does not
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:28:46PM -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
enum{USER, GROUP}
GUIDuserID
GUIDgroupID
The point being a means to have (one of) either group or userid in a
single table row.
Unfortunately, that is
It's been rumoured that Tyson Dowd said:
Personally I tend to think they are becoming an ASP, and they want to be
the gatekeeper of all the cool services people will pay $14.95 a month to
access.
I would second that notion.
There's one technical feature of .NET that tends to get lost in
Rob, I'd like so save the pane layout as part of the .xac file, rather
than have it as a seperate file or as a part of the .gnucash-auto
file.
As it's file metadata, rather than something that fits with a specific
account, transaction, or split, it's not really suitable for putting
in the
It's been rumoured that Christopher Browne said:
Here's the question: if one writes a soap dtd/schema in the M$
framework, it will then auto-generate language bindings for several
languages? (i.e. they treat the soap dtd/schema as an IDL for
all practical purposes? OR did they invent
On 03-Jan-2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's one technical feature of .NET that tends to get lost in the
spin. This might give you an idea of the level of interoperability
you can get. It's possible (indeed, it's simple) for a class written in
one language to
On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 15:54:53 EST, the world broke into rejoicing as
David Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 02:38:45PM -0600, Christopher Browne wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 14:23:22 CST, the world broke into rejoicing as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It's been rumoured
On 02-Jan-2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is way off-topic, but ...
It's been rumoured that Tyson Dowd said:
(Actually M$ has a lot more in the whole language infrastructure thing,
since their VM supports multiple language interoperation at the data
level on the
34 matches
Mail list logo
