On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Robin Norwood wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:49:47 -0500 (CDT) Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Robin Norwood wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:09:20 -0500 (CDT) Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008, Ricky Zhou wrote:
On 2008-08-13 12:29:55 PM, Nigel Jones wrote:
Surely it'd be better suited as 'amber.fedoraproject.org', or something like that, hopefully I'll be back later today/tomorrow to help if needed.
If it requires auth, we'll probably want it at admin.fedoraproject.org so that it can share cookies with our other applications.
it is probably time to better describe what goes where and why. I'm fond of the admin.fedoraproject.org/blah/ for stuff. But if this is an application that end users will be using that doesn't seem quite right.
Yes, it isn't really a fedora 'admin' app. As you said, it's targeted at end users.
Does it have an authed interface for admins or does it pull everything from our repos and such?
It auth against FAS. First, anyone with a FAS account can log in, and post comments and whatnot. Second, if the user happens to own a package that provides a given application, she can edit the app's description, and do things like delete comments and screenshots. Third, if a user is a member of the 'amber_admins' group, he can do the above for all apps, and a few other things.
Does that answer your question?
Yep, thanks.
-Mike