Re: [Hawkular-dev] Tenancy model (was Re: Do not depend on Keycloak anymore)
On 18.04.2016 20:06, Heiko W.Rupp wrote:
On 18 Apr 2016, at 16:57, Juraci Paixão Kröhling wrote:
> I'm still not convinced why we would need two modules. If we assume that
> Hawkular is similar to a database, in the sense that end users have no
> access to it, then there would be no need for any advanced feature from
> Keycloak. Plain JAAS would suffice.
We have 2 different use cases:
- Hawkular as we know it. Including KC, Multi-tenancy and the full enchilada
I still don't get why we need this. What's the concrete use case behind
this requirement? Sure, it's nice to have it all and then some, but
there has to be a reason for having this feature, right? :)
KC would be "free" to have, so, I don't mind it much, but multi tenancy
is done by highly customized code in our side, including nested
organization management and custom permission API. If we don't have any
concrete requirements around this, I'd rather remove, so that we can
have better, cleaner and more elegant solutions on other concrete
requirements, like Pavol's Data Mining.
- Hawkular that works like a database for users like ManageIQ, that
only need
this one technical user to talk to Hawkular.
This one I get.
- Juca.