On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:05:37AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:09:02 -0400, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 11:35:07AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:47:38PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote: > > > > What we need in the first step is to get VFS changes reviewed.Once we > > > > agree on the VFS changes done, then we can start looking at the changes > > > > upto NFS richacl nfs support. When get that merged then we can start > > > > having discussion on how local file system maintainers want to migrate > > > > the existing file system with posixacl to richacl. > > > > > > OK. So, personally: I'm resigned to the idea that we want support for > > > this ACL model. The vfs changes look OK to me (and wouldn't be changed > > > by any comments I'd have on the more richacl-specific patches to > > > follow). So that's an ACK from me on the first set of these patches, > > > assuming it's OK with people to merge these things one step at a time. > > > > Is there any progress on this? > > The next step would be to get Al Viro or Christoph to look at the > proposed VFS changes and get an ACK on them. Meanwhile i can rebase > the full series to the latest linux kernel. > > Apart from that is there any specific changes you would like to see > as a part of richacl patch series. Would you like to see the full > patchset posted to the list or should we go in steps as mentioned above > ? People need to see the users that justify the VFS changes. I think it would be more useful to post all the patches required to get the new feature. With the kernel summit and plumbers conference ongoing this week, there's probably not a great rush. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
