> > > One clarification: someone asked me what had happened to Groups. > >> From past discussions here on the list, I remember the name Group > >> was confusing to a lot of people. What I call Application in my > >> proposal corresponds to the idea of a Group: > >> > >> A Role has Permissions. > >> A User has Roles within an Application (System? Realm? FooBar?) > >> A Session may o may not have a User. > >> > >> If anybody has better names for any of these things, speak up! > > > > I would prefer that a User has Roles within a Module. > > Or if you need to be more explicit, perhaps WebModule. > > WebModule? Bleh.
Ditto. > I do prefer Module to Application, as Application > doesn't make me think "grouping". > > In Helm, we have both UserGroup and ProjectGroup entities > (ProjectGroups are probably near the equivalent of nested Scarab > Modules). > > Gonzalo, I haven't looked at the code yet, but from your description > don't see any interfaces for user or project groups (necessary for > finer grained permissioning). Is there any particular reason not to > include interfaces for these things (preferably ones which do not have > to be used if the user's application does not need'em)? What I called "Application" is what a Group is today in Turbine 2, and I believe it would be akin to your UserGroup. I didn't think about adding ProjectGroup because there was no such thing in T2, and that was my starting point. What would be the exact semantics for ProjectGroup? Where does it fit in: A Role has Permissions. A User has Roles within a UserGroup. A Session may o may not have a User. > Daniel -- Gonzalo A. Diethelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
