Closed ferventcoder closed 10 years ago
This would make sense. My module is a hack, and really not optimized (full re-apply to all paths for any change), but getting things done properly and in a usable way is really tough for sure, and unfortunately not something I would have time for (and I don't know ruby, which doesn't help).
The only thing that I'm sure about is : Whatever is done, there must be a way to manage ACLs for different users on the same resource from different places in a single manifest. This typically means that adding support for POSIX ACLs to the file type wouldn't be a good idea, since it would be way too limited and only cover really trivial cases.
Anyway... I don't think there's any code that can be reused in what I did. The only thing, as you mention, would be about design and the possibilities that the type has to offer.
The acl module was built as a way to "manage ACLs for different users on the same resource from different places in a single manifest."
https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-acl#same-target-multiple-resources
I've been following this since you mentioned it on puppet-users/puppet-dev mailing groups last year and considerable thoughts into the design of the
acl
module were put in (especially the allowing multipleacl
resources to target the same path) to allow for it to work with POSIX acls, it just doesn't have anything built into it yet. The ticket is https://tickets.puppetlabs.com/browse/MODULES-962.The module is https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-acl - I'm sure there are things that have possibly been baked in that have been pushed too high (to the type versus left down at the provider) that would need to be fixed.
I like that you have set target as an array. That could potentially be a way to go for
acl
as well.I'd like to get your thoughts on design changes that would be required and if you would be interested in integrating to an acl that is a
type
withproviders
.