On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:52 PM, sachin kale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That makes sense, > That would be a good addition to CE. > > Also going further if it makes sense and is viable, I think we can have all > the functionality attached to profile object like - > photos/forums/blogs/friendship etc > > For group, we can select forum/photos/(membership - friendship model - > renamed in the view) etc > For user - photos/comments/blog/friendship etc. > > The functionality selection for group/user can be decided from a config > file. I am aware this would be huge task though but this would result in > more flexibility.
I like this direction .. how about this? * Each user always belongs to a group * Each group has roles associated with it 'a.k.a' photos, comments, blogs, etc * If a user is being created and added explicitly to a group at the same time, they get the set of roles associated with that group. * If a user is self-sign up, they get the roles assigned by the CE admin associated with a global or default group .. the default group would be created at CE setup time. * For multiple groups, the user gets the functionality of a group when acting on a group created resource .. or if they are acting on a resource that is not owned by any of the groups they belong to, they get the default/global set of roles. Also a huge task, but adds a lot of possibilities going forward, including then having heirarchical groups and provides a consistent relationship model throughout the system. - Max --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CommunityEngine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/communityengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
