Re: RFC: roles

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: "pgadmin-hackers" <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "ennixo" <ennixo(at)free(dot)fr>
Subject: Re: RFC: roles
Date: 2005-08-01 14:30:37
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4AC96A4@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers

[CC'd to Niko as he probably want's to know about this as well]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de]
> Sent: 01 August 2005 15:15
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] RFC: roles
>
> I'm thinking different here, because you're using roles and users in
> different situations.
> When editing roles, you're planning the access scheme layout without
> necessarily having certain persons in mind. After the app is
> installed,
> you won't touch roles any more.
> In contrast, adding users and assigning them existing roles is a
> day-by-day business. That's why I'd like them separated.

Hmmm... What about:

Roles
- Login
- dave
- andreas
- niko
- Organisational (perhaps something shorter?)
- support
- finance
- admin

Speaking of which, how does this cope with my user www which is in group
www?

> (BTW, the icons for Roles/Role are already done, so just use a
> > placeholder for now).
>
> I don't see them in SVN... :-)

No, you don't :-)

/D

Responses

Browse pgadmin-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Pflug 2005-08-01 16:52:07 Re: RFC: roles
Previous Message Andreas Pflug 2005-08-01 14:15:11 Re: RFC: roles