Groups policy

[Joel Peshkin]

Gervase Markham wrote:

> MattyT wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 16:40, Gervase Markham wrote:
>>
>>> or is it to create a new group for each thing ("canenterbugs" etc.)
>>> and ask admins to join their new users to all the groups they'd like
>>> them to have access to (either automatically using the regexp or by
>>> hand)?
>>
>>
>> Avoiding this is the whole reason why the concepts of role and group
>> should be separated, and the idea of "system groups" removed.  If you
>> have a group, you can say that group gets multiple roles.
>
>
> That makes sense. Is this part of Joel's "industrial-strength groups" 
> patch, or is there another bug open on this?
> <snip>


I think the groups system provides a foundation on which such a roles 
system can be built.  One that exists, then all the "which group can do 
what" mappings should convert.

-Joel