Bruce wrote:
>
> >
> > No, there isn't more on that. It's just to be more backward
> > compatible. Users out there might have already views and
> > since it wasn't neccessary to set explicit permissions on a
> > view up to now (views inherited the permissions from all
> > tables they select), it's unlikely that anyone out there set
> > them up.
> >
> > I think it's better to implement something that's a key to
> > open the door instead of opening it by default and telling
> > where's the key to lock it back.
>
> This code is big enough without adding system table columns to allow
> backward compatability. Just tell them as part of the upgrade, they
> need to set GRANT/REVOKE on views. Put it in the /migration files too.
If that's OK for all of us let's add the information to
/migration and the view permissions stuff is done then.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #
