Yurii Kuznietsov

Hi, I don't like an idea having the same parameter in multiple places.

I don't see how manipulating entityDefs is easiear than entityAcl. I really don't see problem that acl parameters are placed separately. I like them being separate from other parameters.

I would like to stick with the way how it is.

Ok. I seems understand your point now. It would be easier to have this parameters in Field Manager.

Moving to entityDefs is not an option. It's too much of backward compatibility problems. Handling in backend so that it stores/fetch to/from entityAcl is not a big deal.

entityAcl was not supposed to be customizable. Field Level Security is supposed to handle an access. entityAcl was intended for system fields first.

It's not as simple as it may seem. I spend days investigating for such small things that may seem trivial.

I'm too busy with 6.0.0. I can't digress on anything else now. I can not merge it. Sorry.

There's already 'readOnly' parameter in entityDefs that only affects UI. After your change, you will have this parameter affecting access control. I tested it once, making 'readOnly' be honored by...

> In future, if you decided to move to entity defs we can design the afterUpgrade function to do the magic, I believe it is less than 20 line of...