Re: extended acls..

[Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>]

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 02:06:08PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 09:50:42AM -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> > Howdy,
> > 
> > I'm curious if there is any plans to add extended acls ala AFS?  The
> > reason I ask is that it seems in Linux we don't seem have moved off of
> > POSIX style acls and I think there is definitely at least from my
> > perspective that having a richer set of acl would be needed.  For
> > instance, we would need acls to deal with controlled countries if we
> > are sharing data with them etc.  It is a big shame that there is no
> > RFC for extended ACLs.
> > 
> > Also, I would like to help out with development, I'm a newbie as far
> > as kernel level hacking goes.  If there is a place I can go that I can
> > start off small that would be lovely.
> >
> 
> Extending ACLs beyond POSIX ACLs is a more generic topic that should probably be
> discussed elsewhere, perhaps linux-fsdevel.  Its not going to do much good to
> implement yet another extended ACL implementation in BTRFS if no other Linux fs
> has the ability to use the same feature, so figuring out the details of
> extending ACLs should be done before doing them in btrfs.  Thanks,
> 

I'd agree with this.  The idea behind the btrfs acl/xattr implementation
is to be generic enough to support whatever new ideas people come up
with.  But, I don't intend on driving new acl frameworks through btrfs
before they are available in other filesystems.

-chris