Skip to content

support sub-shares? #75

Closed
Closed

Description

@michielbdejong

What if you for instance get read access to /foo but write access to /foo/bar? In OCM that would be two separate shares, and if you open /foo and then drill down to /foo/bar, the receiving server will not recognise that you entered the folder where you do have read/write

Activity

  1. smesterheide commented on May 19, 2023

    @smesterheide
    Contributor

    Seems right on the surface, /foo/bar is more specific than /foo. My question here is are we going to mimic POSIX file system permissions?

  2. glpatcern commented on Sep 30, 2024

    @glpatcern
    Member

    [Reviewing all outstanding issues] this is IMHO implementation-dependent, meaning that we may well have OCM implementations that use some POSIX-like ACLs and do the "right thing" (in the example, give write access to /foo/bar even when browsing from a read-only /foo folder).

    As an example, this is how EOS works and how CERNBox exposes OCM shares.

    The question is whether we want the spec to explicitly state what is the "right thing" to do, or whether to leave this aspect deliberately unspecified.

  3. locked and limited conversation to collaborators on Oct 17, 2024
  4. converted this issue into a discussion #151 on Oct 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions