Glenn Skinner wrote:
The following is a nit-level comment, so I've directed it onl;y to you, rather than to the entire list.Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:57:35 -0600 From: Mark Shellenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [zfs-discuss] Proposal: delegated administrationThe following is the delegated admin model that Matt and I have been working on. At this point we are ready for your feedback on the proposed model.... PERMISSION REVOKING zfs unallow <dataset> [-r] [-l] [-d] <"everyone"|user|group>[,<"everyone"|user|group>...] \ <ability>[,<ability>...] <dataset> zfs unallow [-r][-l][-d] -u user <ability>[,<ability>...] <dataset> zfs unallow [-r][-l][-d] -g group <ability>[,<ability>...] <dataset>zfs unallow [-r][-l][-d] -e <ability>[,<ability>...] <dataset>Please, can we have "disallow" instead of "unallow"? The former is a real word, the latter isn't. -- Glenn
The reasoning behind unallow was to imply that you are simply removing an "allow". With *disallow* it would sound more like you are denying a permission.
-Mark _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
