I see.. So what you are saying is that a user, in a group, has a specific role.. Which makes sense based on the image... Ergo, you have have these entities: User Role Group Permission UserGroupRole in otherwords, instead of a user having a collection of roles, they have a what? I think the base dynamic enties maybe don't do all that you need.. But maybe you can extend them?
Eric > -----Original Message----- > From: Humberto Hernandez Torres [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 7:21 PM > To: Turbine Developers List > Subject: RE: Fulcrum security service > > > I was thinking that the turbine model has relationship user > <-> group just > like the Dynamic model with the difference that you can also > assign a role. > Thus, a user plays a role within a group. > In the Dynamic model a user belongs to a group but you cannot > specify which > role the user plays within the group. > Does it make sense? > -- > Humberto > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eric Pugh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:15 PM > > To: 'Turbine Developers List' > > Subject: RE: Fulcrum security service > > > > > > 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] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
