On 4/25/16 8:38 AM, Kabir Khan wrote:
> On 25 Apr 2016, at 14:26, Ladislav Thon <lthon(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> How would you propose discriminating these cases?
>> 1) /subsystem=messaging is not allowed but its children are.
>> 2) /subsystem=messaging and its children are.
> Well, there's not a lot of possibilities with a rigid scheme I'm
> proposing. A boolean attribute 'children-only' is the only thing I can
> come up with.
Darn! I was hoping for an easy answer and asked because I didn't have
time at the moment to think. I'm still hoping. ;)
TBH, 'children-only' isn't so terrible if there isn't some standard
syntax for this kind of thing.
> I'll be the first to admit that a regexp-based scheme is
> flexible, no doubt about that. (But with great power ...)
To help with this, could we not add an operation which shows which resources will be
I'm not sure how that could work if the base-role is Operator, which
only has rights to runtime-only changes. For base roles with perms to
write the config we could recursively test
OperationContext.readResourceForUpdate() but that wouldn't show any
perms at all for Operator.
> wildfly-dev mailing list
wildfly-dev mailing list
Senior Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat