[PATCH] Add variable to define if a share should be hidden.

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 16:04 -0500, David Collier-Brown wrote:
> Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 09:51 -0500, David Collier-Brown wrote:
> > 
> >>A janitorial question: are not the variables the opposites
> >>of each other, so browseable = no means the same as hidden = yes?
> >>
> >>  If so, and if someone created a share called "foo$", then we
> >>could set the variable by default, and report it in testparm
> >>as whichever of browseable = no or hidden = yes makes sense.
> >>
> >>  Otherwise we risk creating two disjoint variables with 
> >>overlapping semantics, which will look bizzare to anyone
> >>trying to figure out which to use... and they they'll get it
> >>wrong!
> > 
> > 
> > I still think that having an option for 'actually hide this' and another
> > for 'tell the client to hide this' is asking for trouble.  
> 
>   At the pure semantic level, calling this one "mark as hidden"
> disambiguates them somewhat...
> 
>   The possible confusion is a concern to me, but it's similar to
> having a way to not serve files and also a way to mark 
> them "tell the client to hide this".

I actually think that (tell client to hide share) should be the option
name.  Anything else makes it sound like an inverse alias for
'browseable'.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett
http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20080227/446de125/attachment.bin