Sharepoint equiv for Linux

[Darryl Moore]

Damn, just when I figure I've got a through understanding of everything,
I got to go and learn a whole other category of stuff.

I found a bunch of stuff on ACL's for linux here

http://www.suse.de/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/

and here:

http://beginlinux.com/server_training/server-managment-topics/1038-ubuntu-804-access-control-lists

They do however only seam to offer a small incremental improvement in
control at the expense of significantly more complication. I think Linux
groups offer sufficient control and are much easier to administer. Or am
I missing something?

I found this for cost of sharepoint

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepointserver/FX102176831033.aspx

yeah, that is pretty expensive I think.

I found gforge in the repos so I think I'll check it out and see how it
compares to sharepoint.

mcr at simtone.net wrote:
>>>>>> "Darryl" == Darryl Moore <darryl at moores.ca> writes:
>     Darryl> I don't know a lot about MS networks. One of the things I
>     Darryl> was surprised to hear is that everybody has to ask the IT
>     Darryl> department to set up folders so they can share documents,
>     Darryl> and that permissions for these folders are set up on a user
>     Darryl> by user basis. There does not appear to be any concept of
>     Darryl> groups like in Linux.
> 
>   At the NTFS/Microsoft-Sharing level, there are groups and there are
> also extended ACLs that go way beyond what Linux has. (Although ext3 and
> ext4 has some of this, not commonly enabled)
> 
>   Sharepoint is not the same thing though.
>   My experience is that MS is in fact very powerful, but since the
> people running it are lowest-bidders, they don't know how to set things
> up.
> 
>     Darryl> The other thing she told me was that they would soon be
>     Darryl> roling out a SharePoint server which is suppose to be the
>     Darryl> holy grail and will eleviate all their issues. What I
>     Darryl> understand about Sharepoint is that it is basically a fancy
>     Darryl> version control system, and is very expensive.
> 
>   Yes, that's the case. Very $$$$, and doesn't really help often: it's
> too complex for most users.
>