Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: new default get_netsync_*_permitted hooks

[Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker]

In message <address@hidden> on Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:01:19 -0500, Timothy 
Brownawell <address@hidden> said:

tbrownaw> On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 15:46 -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
tbrownaw> > On Sun, 2005-10-23 at 21:40 +0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
tbrownaw> > > Finally, I don't think I like the syntax you propose.  
tbrownaw> > > Is this already used somewhare? 
tbrownaw> > > I think access control configuration is used in lots
tbrownaw> > > of places, so maybe there is already a thought out
tbrownaw> > > format for these kind of things.  
tbrownaw> > > But he, I am not an expert on this at all.
tbrownaw> > 
tbrownaw> > I don't think its great either, but I'm not sure what would be 
better.
tbrownaw> 
tbrownaw> Random idea:
tbrownaw> 
tbrownaw> 
tbrownaw> pattern "net.example.project.{security,private}*"
tbrownaw> allow "address@hidden"
tbrownaw> allow "address@hidden"
tbrownaw> 
tbrownaw> pattern "net.example.{public,project}*"
tbrownaw> others "allow"

Random response:

I think it's quite confusing how the format is sometimes
'verb "subject"' and sometimes 'subject "verb"'.  I would rather have
some kind of consistency:

 pattern "net.example.project.{security,private}*"
 allow "address@hidden"
 allow "address@hidden"
 
 pattern "net.example.{public,project}*"
 allow "*"

Cheers,
Richard

-- 
Richard Levitte                         address@hidden
                                        http://richard.levitte.org/

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including
 the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
                                                -- C.S. Lewis