On 05/27/2011 12:07 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 12:07 -0400, Bryan Kearney wrote:
> On 05/27/2011 11:48 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 14:02 -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>>> Based on an environment, I may have a different set of permissions. In
>>> addition there may be additional images I can see in that environment.
>> Well ...
>> The only time I see environment coming into this from a user's
>> perspective is when they are launching a deployable - i.e. they are
>> launching a deployable in an environment
>> And the only permission that seems relevant when launching a deployable
>> is whether a given image is available to that user for that environment
>> So, I'd prefer the less generic version .... or multiple less generic
>> statements that make it more obvious what policy is being enforced.
> need to consider org/environment. Each tenant (org) could have unique
> set of environments.
Hmm, you're going to need to elaborate that for me.
I guess I'm asking whether there is some time other the deployable
launch that Conductor would need environment/org policy enforced?
From the Katello side, we have seen a strong notion of Service
Providers. These guys host for many customers. In that case, a user
would be tied to one or more Tenants (one per customer). These in turn
have a lifecycle.