Re: Auth_Groups and Auth_Permissions

On 15 août 04, at 18:05, Paul M Jones wrote snip snip

The second you have permissions, you also want to have roles.

None of my earlier email was meant to say anything about permissions. If I was not clear before, let me be so now. I am only concerned with a Groups add-on to Auth, not permissions. I agree that permissions modeling is complex and difficult, but I am not worried about that at all with just an Auth_Groups package. Nothing I have said is in relation to permissions management in any way. To reiterate: Auth_Permissions may or may not be a good addition to PEAR, but Auth_Groups is a great idea and sorely needed. Just to clarify my previous comments where mainly relevant to Auth_Permissions, not Auth_Groups. I don't know enough on groups permissions to commend on this draft but for Auth_Permissions (false/true only) I confirm that it will not have a great utility and might well be a duplication of existing solutions. From a first review some of the groups permissions mechanisms exist on liveuser hence my comments.

Perhaps I got it wrong, but is not easy to comment on a draft/idea only. I would have been able to further comment if we had a clear situation where the existing packages don't fit the bill (vs commenting that they are too big, complex or try to do everything. These allegations are very vague). Like "I would like to build package X which will not duplicate the existing Y packages because....and Y packages functionality doesn't cover what I intend to do with package X). Regards David Costa