ctubbsii commented on PR #3118: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3118#issuecomment-1352249800
> How about I'm not sure the typical output, but I suspect we don't need the granularity of having `READ` and `WRITE` (`MODIFY`), `PRIVATE` and `NOT_PRIVATE`. It's probably enough to just note that the field is private or not, and we can get the extra granularity by looking at the enumerated permissions on the right side. Unless it's needed for the typical setup, I'd propose to keep it simpler. As for the `ERROR_ACCUMULO_REQUIRES_ALL`, I think `ACCUMULO_MISSING_SOME` would be the grammatical and logic opposite. In thinking about this some more, I think we care about: 1. What permissions does ACCUMULO have? (`ACCUMULO_HAS_ALL`, `ACCUMULO_MISSING_SOME`) 2. What permissions does "anyone" have? 3. Are there other permissions? For simplicity, I was proposing grouping the last two cases into the simplified (`PRIVATE`, `NOT_PRIVATE`), and not worrying about the granularity of that for the left-side column. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
