[keycloak-dev] hierarchical only groups?

[Stian Thorgersen]

I'm sure there are benefits of a group belonging to groups, but I think
it's outweighed by the complexity involved.

On 20 October 2015 at 13:48, Marek Posolda <mposolda at redhat.com> wrote:

> That's similar to how it worked for GateIn portal . There was only
> parent-child notion and each group could be identified easily by path
> consisting of it's simple name and parent hierarchy. For example root
> group "platform" had path "/platform" . The subgroup "finance" of root
> group "platform" had path "/platform/finance" etc.
>
> All the roles were always assigned to user per group, so there was
> notion like: User "john" is member of role "admin" in group
> "/platform/finance" etc. Visualization was quite easy - some screenshots
> are here:
> https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL39/Manage+Users+and+Groups
> .
>
> I think this model was sufficient (at least for portal purposes). Can't
> any customer wanted the structure with group being child of multiple
> parent groups.
>
> Marek
>
>
> On 19/10/15 16:40, Bill Burke wrote:
> > I was wondering if it would be ok to only have parent/child, tree
> > structure relationship between groups.  Meaning, a group can't belong to
> > multiple groups.
> >
> > I was just thinking about modeling a large company with groups.  How
> > would you visualize the group structure within the admin console?  A
> > hierarchical-only group structure would allow you to define a group with
> > a simple non-unique names.  i.e. "admins", "customers".
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/keycloak-dev/attachments/20151020/312e51c4/attachment.html