Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Jan Rychtar wrote: > > Yes, it works good, but... wouldn't it be more straightforward if the "no > branch specified = match any branch" rule worked for all users and not > just "default"? That would be a major change in behaviour, and would break existing setups. It also doesn't make a lot of sense to me - If I give read access to a user I don't expect that permission to propogate to branches automatically. Default means 'default for all branches' now, which is at least intuitive, but starting to make the user permissions bleed into other branches is not intuitive at all. I reiterate at this point that the ACL system is *not* a replacement for correctly setup NTFS permissions. It's useful for locking down branches that are in code freeze etc. but trying to make it a generic permissions system is doomed to failure - the capability just isn't there. > What do you think about this? I find this behavior fine and clear. I think > other commonly used permission mechanisms work just like this. I'm not aware of any commonly used permission mechanisms that have a branch system to take into account.... Tony