Bug 122933

Summary: Proposal for redesigning ACL/Advanced Permissions dialog
Product: [Frameworks and Libraries] frameworks-kio Reporter: urwald <urwald>
Component: generalAssignee: David Faure <faure>
Status: CONFIRMED ---    
Severity: wishlist CC: kde, kdelibs-bugs, nate, slammer
Priority: NOR    
Version: unspecified   
Target Milestone: ---   
Platform: unspecified   
OS: Linux   
Latest Commit: Version Fixed In:
Attachments: proposal

Description urwald 2006-03-01 22:21:55 UTC
Version:            (using KDE KDE 3.5.1)

Being partially a bug and partially a wish, I put this under "whishlist".

Since resolving bug 119367 with SVN commit 501392 by Till Adam, it is no longer possible to delete default entries for owner, owning group and others. On the one hand, this is a little bit logical (you can't delete only one of these entries, delete all or none!), on the other hand now it's not possible to remove default acls completly with konqueror.

Furthermore, when you want to add a default ACL to a directory and you begin with a default entry for "owner", then you don't have the possiblity to add a default entry for "owning group" and "others" - and these entries are nessecary in this case (you have to leave the "extended permissions" dialog and reopen it to view and edit these entries). On the other hand, when adding a default acl entry for "owner", also a default entry for "mask" is generated - but this would not be nessecary.

It's a little bit difficult to find a good UI solution for this problem. However here a proposal for long terms (may be an idea for kde 4):

Make the permissions dialog a tab dialog with one tab for the "normal" permissions (everything like now, but without default acl). Then make a second tab leaving the user choose if he wants to determinate the acl/permissions new of files/directories by umask (= no acl, that what mostly happens but much people don't know) or if he wants to specify the acl/permissions himself. A screenshot is attached.
Comment 1 urwald 2006-03-01 22:23:22 UTC
Created attachment 14921 [details]
proposal
Comment 2 Janek Bevendorff 2012-09-07 14:27:49 UTC
*** Bug 212805 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***