[tahoe-lafs-trac-stream] [tahoe-lafs] #1568: S3 backend: [storage]readonly is documented but ignored

[tahoe-lafs]

#1568: S3 backend: [storage]readonly is documented but ignored
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
     Reporter:           |      Owner:  zooko
  davidsarah             |     Status:  assigned
         Type:  defect   |  Milestone:  1.10.0
     Priority:  major    |    Version:  1.9.0b1
    Component:  code-    |   Keywords:  s3-backend readonly storage lae
  storage                |  review-needed
   Resolution:           |
Launchpad Bug:           |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment (by gdt):

 Replying to [comment:8 davidsarah]:

 That's all fine.   I was just reacting to what I perceived to be "why
 bother having options if someone can just chmod some directory".  Deciding
 that read-only as a concept doesn't make sense seems entirely reasonable.

 I think it does make sense for a server operator to be able to configure
 the server not to take new shares, and also for it to be in some sort of
 advertised-as-going-away mode.  But as you say that may be a different
 concept.

 As for ITS, it's been a long time - but a convenient way to point out that
 network server semantics and local filesystem semantics need not match.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1568#comment:10>
tahoe-lafs <http://tahoe-lafs.org>
secure decentralized storage