hmm.. I can not agree on this issue.
roles is not just another name for groups. when you thnink about
windows nt user managment or selinux, you will see what a role is and
what is a group, these are totally different concepts. your
implementation of groups is a concept of roles really, groups are much
less..
Well, somebody asked the question on liveuser list. The definition was that a role implements policies, policies have a set of right assigned to them (that what i remember anyway).
Is that what you mean ?
It's not that we don't want to implement something but it sounds like the current groups do it ;)
I guess you could also write a custom perm container which would implement what you need while using LiveUser API. With getPermContainer of the base LiveUser class you could use custom methods for role-management, or so it seems :)
but yeah perhaps I coulds live with r_thingy and g_thingy..