On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 9/2/15 4:19 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> maybe - but having a fixed "default" is very different from baking a
>> classic unix permission concept of user/group/world^others into actual
>> DDL or into a COPY option. The proposed syntax might make some sense to
>> a admin used to a unix style system but it is likely utterly
>> incomprehensible to somebody who is used to (windows style) ACLs.
>>
>> I dont have a good answer on what to do else atm but I dont think we
>> should embedded traditional/historical unix permission models in our
>> grammer unless really really needed...
>
> The user can just create a directory with appropriate permissions and
> copy the files there. I don't really see why COPY needs to know about
> all this.
In short, it seems that this patch is better rejected. And I am
planning to do so if there are no complaints.
--
Michael
