Thanks - this is useful.

However, my concern is that there could ultimately be a very large  
number of resources and I wonder what the performance repercussions  
would be of just using the roles as is.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Jeremy

On Jun 16, 2008, at 4:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> The easiest solution is to name your roles with the resource they  
> apply to.
> Say you have resources r1, r2, and r3 you could name your roles:
>
> r1-edit
> r2-edit
> r3-edit
> r1-write
> r2-write
> etc
>
> As long as you don't use ``-`` characters elsewhere in the role name  
> this
> works fine. You then just test for the role ``r1-edit``.
>
> The alternative is to write your own custom permissions and your own  
> custom
> data store. This works fine too but is a lot more work and actually  
> amounts
> to the same thing anyway. Incidentally, very early versions of AuthKit
> supported this functionality but I dropped it because the same thing  
> was so
> easily implemented by just using the naming convention described  
> above.
>
> Hope that helps,
>
> James
>
>
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Jeremy Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 13:00:27 -0700
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: "Preferred" approach to extend Authkit to resource level
> access-control
>
>
>
> The architecture of Authkit (and the examples/tutorial) seem to assume
> that users have access-control/permissions at the application-wide
> level.
>
> The application I am developing requires access-control/permissions at
> the per resource level.  i.e. each user has various permissions (read,
> write, edit, delete) on an arbitrary number of resources.
>
> Do any Authkit experts on this list have a strong view on how to use
> Authkit in this context?  I'd rather not reinvent the wheel.
>
> Thanks,
> JB
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web.com - Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider -
> http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange
>
>
>
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to