On Wednesday 31 October 2001 10:26, you wrote: > Yes, You're right , but I think that my case shows that , I cannot make > things like You said. I _need_ have two SG and two hosts , but I want > share just one topics' object.
But if you want to share content, and have it editable by non-root users, why do you need two SGs? > I cannot make it just with goups within one SG. > There should be something like SG0, but very modified. > Look SG0 is now useless. It isn't. Shared admin sites (which you _want_ to be read-only) like nadmin and asgard use it. > It is because it is. What custom user may do with it? Nothing Correct. SGs is not about sharing. It's about separating. The're opposing goals. > Sharing SG is like read access in groups within one SG , for me. That is absolutely correct. If we want something else we should design that. Emile --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
