* Colin Hill <hillct at scoophost.com> [27 Jan 2005 13:34]: > While I agree that user specific privileges are a good thing, some > serious thought needs to be given to how these privileges will inter > operate with one another. Right now, you are granted or not granted a > privilege based on your group membership. When you add per-user > privileges will user privileges trump group privileges? It sounds > based on the proposal that this is the intent. Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind. > If user privileges can be set to either grant or deny, shouldn't group > perms work the same way, so you can explicitly deny? Maybe, but making fundamental changes to group perms is well beyond the scope of what I intended for this bug. I'm looking for a small, simple change that does what I want now rather than grand over-arching (but still good) changes later. 2.0 Perhaps? :-) Mike -- Michael Bain | One day I want to look through three hundred mike at mostly-harmless.ca| thousand kilometres of space and say: GPG-ID: 0xA30A5493 | "My isn't there a beautiful Earth out tonight!" -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.kuro5hin.org/pipermail/scoop-dev/attachments/20050129/562ec4ab/attachment.bin