Il giorno 15/dic/2012, alle ore 13.16, ernst Developer ha scritto: > Hi Fabio, > > This seems a very good idea. > You could also consider a complete new mapping tab page on which we could > do the sync mapping. In that case the current mapping is used for > propagation.
Hi Ernst, yes, this is an alternative but I'd prefer to have all the mappings about the same resource into a single tab. I think that, in this way, mapping configuration would be simple and easy to manage (in terms of troubleshooting). Don't you agree? Regards, F. > Regards, > Ernst > > > 2012/12/14 Denis Signoretto <denis.signore...@intesys.it> > >> >> Another way to get the same result couldn't be >> creating a specialization between sync and provisioned resources? >> >> Regards, >> Denis >> >>> -----Messaggio originale----- >>> Da: Fabio Martelli [mailto:fabio.marte...@gmail.com] >>> Inviato: venerdì 14 dicembre 2012 16:55 >>> A: dev@syncope.apache.org >>> Oggetto: Schema Mapping improvement >>> >>> >>> Hi guys, >>> since I see a strong limitation about the schema mapping >>> configuration I'd like to discuss with you about an improvement. >>> >>> From my PPOV Syncope should give the possibility to specify >>> two different mappings for synchronization and propagation. >>> >>> My suggestion is to provide two boolean flags: the former to >>> specify a propagation mapping and the latter to specify a >>> synchronization mapping. >>> Of course, each mapping must have a flag to true at least. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> Regards, >>> F. >>> >>
