[aerogear-dev] [Unified Push Server] Roles structure & password management

Matthias Wessendorf matzew at apache.org
Thu Oct 17 10:15:23 EDT 2013 

you mean grouping ?


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>
>> any corp. org. may want some with just read-only access;
>> The project lead is allowed to update the keys etc, but all the /normal/
>> developers can just see the IDs/secrets (so that they can use it in their
>> server apps).
>>
>
> This is also an interesting point, at some point don't we want the "read"
> rights limited to a single/set of pushapps or even a level deeper based on
> variants ?
> Maybe in a big company, Bob the slacker intern has read access for his
> supracool push app but also has access to the Public Relation Push App
>  keys ...
>
>
>
>> I guess that's not really (at least for me) closely related to a 'test
>> via admin ui' feature
>>
>> -M
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure about the role: user.
>>>
>>> What will be the use case for this one?
>>> One use case, I see is if the 'user' is a tester. If we had the feature
>>> to send push notification test via admin UI (as we discussed in [1] and
>>> [2]).
>>>
>>> ++
>>> Corinne
>>> [1]
>>> http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-Push-Server-Admin-UI-td2678.html#a2718
>>> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-38
>>>
>>> On Oct 17, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Oct 15, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> So for the next Unified Push Release (0.9) it would be nice if we
>>> could have some decent User Management, so I'm bumping this thread again.
>>> >> Some existing pointer :
>>> >>
>>> >> -   this thread :)
>>> >> -  https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-351
>>> >> -  https://gist.github.com/sebastienblanc/6547605
>>> >>
>>> >> First point to define is :
>>> >> -  What roles do we want ? And what can these Roles do ?
>>> >
>>> > Admin - Can do all things including creating other users
>>> > Developer - can create apps and such. no access to the user management
>>> UI
>>> > User - read only - not sure if this one is needed
>>> > Yes, not sure also but why not ? Could be useful for a monitoring
>>> app/RHQ plugin that just want to retrieve the list of active pushapps ...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > +1 - I like these three different roles, including their rights
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> -  How can these Roles be created (granted ...)
>>> >> -  Design
>>> >
>>> > I think we are still waiting on Hylke for this?   not sure
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Seb
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Apostolos Emmanouilidis <
>>> aemmanou at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> >> Following the discussion on GitHub [1], here are some points to be
>>> >> discussed about the user management flow:
>>> >>
>>> >> - Does it make sense to add a role select field (admin, developer) on
>>> >> the enrollment page?
>>> >>
>>> >> hrm, and (perhaps later) a section where to define the roles ? I
>>> think it's a good point, but not sure we need all this 'now' :-)
>>> >>
>>> >> - Should we add an additional password field (password confirmation)
>>> on
>>> >> the enrollment page?
>>> >>
>>> >> yeah, would be nice
>>> >>
>>> >> - I think that the current logged in user shouldn't be available for
>>> >> deletion
>>> >>
>>> >> yep, I agree
>>> >>
>>> >> [1]:
>>> >>
>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server-admin-ui/pull/6
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 10:15 +0200, Sebastien Blanc wrote:
>>> >> > A Jira has been created https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-351
>>> >> > And draft structure has been created
>>> >> > here https://gist.github.com/sebastienblanc/6547605 that can be
>>> used
>>> >> > as base for the Pull Request.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx at qmx.me> wrote:
>>> >> >         On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 09:39:28AM -0300, Bruno Oliveira
>>> >> >         wrote:
>>> >> >         > Would be nice to have a 8 hands document on it
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >         who's going to start the pull request on it? it's SPECTIME!
>>> >> >
>>> >> >         --
>>> >> >         qmx
>>> >> >         _______________________________________________
>>> >> >         aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> >> >         aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> >> >         https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> >> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> >> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>
>>> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> >> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> >> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >
>>> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>> > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20131017/5ec5a1ad/attachment.html

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list