On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Miller, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> As an end user, I think even with just a single tool, the argument for a > group is there. > > As Saminda suggested, one may wish to have a join area to work in with a > group, and individual work you aren't ready to share, even with just a > single tool. > > > > Because a Gateway is wide open, it is easy to imagine a case where there > are several groups, each with (potentially overlapping) users, who all are > working with Amber for different projects.. > Agreed. I totally forgot about shared projects scenario. Thanks for pointing it out Mark. > > > Mark > > > > *From:* Saminda Wijeratne [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, January 31, 2014 9:11 AM > *To:* dev > *Subject:* Re: Users and UserGroups in Science Gateways > > > > I'm not an expert on the Amber usecase, but I suppose it is possible to > have multiple user groups for a single usecase. It could be to have a > shared space of data hidden from each user group. It could be to author > access/privilledges to the portal or resources depending on the user group. > > I would assume the mapping of user to usergroups would be many to one > mapping. Unlike user roles I don't think it is sensible to have users being > mapped to multiple groups (there is a whole area of security to consider > here). > > > > (I do have to note that usergroup IMO is not a must concept for a science > gateway) > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Sachith Withana <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Can someone explain to me the mapping of users to groups in a Science > Gateway? ( This is regarding the Amber usecase). > > > > Can there be multiple user groups in a gateway portal when it comes to > just one usecase? > > ex: If we have only one usecase for the portal ( such as Amber) > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Sachith Withana > > >
