Humberto, Thanks for the input, and the images definitly help clarity! I was hoping that the entities used by the Dynamic model under the covers could be glued together using the Turbine model. To me, the key differences are:
1) Global group. However, the Turbine group manager has the ability to look one up, and if it doesn't exist, create it. 2) The intersection of user/group/role.. I think that could be put in just using the TurbineModelManager. When a grant or revoke is done, it adds the user to the group, and adds the role to the group... That way it should all flow out? If not, we should fix it. Or remove the model, as having a halfway there model is worse then no model! And clarity (and patchs :-) ) you can provide are much appreciated! Eric > -----Original Message----- > From: Humberto Hernandez Torres [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 4:31 PM > To: Turbine Developers List > Subject: Fulcrum security service > > > Hi Eric, I took a look at the new fulcrum security service. I > can tell there > has been a lot of work on it. I liked the flexibility to use several > implementations NT, memory, Hibernate, and Torque. > > I tried to understand the three models and for that I built > an example which > I added to the documentation. I also added some images to > show the models. > My concern is that the Dynamic model is not as flexible and > powerfull as the > Turbine model. I tried several ways to solve the example > using the model, > but the solutions can become very complex so left the > solution incomplete > waiting for some inspiration. > > -- > Humberto > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
