Am 17.04.2006 um 05:13 schrieb Alec Thomas:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 08:57:20PM +0200, Christian Boos wrote:
Yes, and targeting it for 0.11...
I'd be +1 for this, obviously. The criteria being:
- Simple, but flexible
- Unobtrusive
- Backwards compatibility
For 1.0, all bets are off (?), but as with Spam control, I think
useful
permission control would be better sooner than later.
I think that 0.11 is already pretty loaded with major changes, so
targeting this at 0.12 may be better for now. Depends on the scope of
the changes, of course... if it's not that much, 0.11 may be okay.
So, regarding terminology? :) I suggest calling them 'resources', as
'objects' is very generic, and connotative of having some extra
functionality that may not exist. Not everything the security system
applies to will refelect this, eg. about/config pages.
user X has permission to user resource Y
or rather:
subject S is [granted|denied] permission to do action A (with
resource R)?
Cheers,
Chris
--
Christopher Lenz
cmlenz at gmx.de
http://www.cmlenz.net/
_______________________________________________
Trac-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.edgewall.com/mailman/listinfo/trac-dev
