[almighty] Project Writeup
Monica Granfield
mgranfie at redhat.com
Mon Oct 31 13:30:43 UTC 2016
I am not sure we are including roles, although I would think they are
useful, as they are basically pre-packaged/template permissions for reuse.
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Leonard Dimaggio <ldimaggi at redhat.com>
wrote:
> P.S. wrt to teams - are we thinking about defining roles for users - where
> each role definition consists of permissions to perform specific tasks?
>
> --Len D.
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Thomas Mäder <tmader at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks, I've tried to write up what I think project features are going
>> to be in almighty in the future. I've tried to enumerate things that seem
>> relevant to how we implement projects in the short run. Once again, I would
>> invite interested parties to read through this and point out where my
>> understanding is wrong or not complete. Next step would be to define what
>> we need to do next to introduce projects.
>>
>> thx,
>>
>> /Thomas
>> Project functions
>>
>> Based on the PDD and https://github.com/almighty/almighty-core/issues/357,
>> I see the following roles for projects in almighty:
>>
>> - Process Configuration
>> 1603E130 & 1603E131 imply that for each project, there is a
>> configuration of allowed work item types. I would also expect process
>> workflow (states, transitions, permissions) to be configured at this level.
>> This requires a way to specify the configuration when creating a project.
>> The PDD sees the creation of new configurations as a admin level task
>> available to the operators of the service, not something that users of the
>> service can do. For the user, it would be as simple as selecting a "project
>> type" when creating a project. We would have to create a configuration and
>> migrate our existing work items into that project.
>> - Work Item Owner
>> This implies that a work item is a all times associated with exactly
>> one project. Deleting the project would imply that the work item is deleted
>> as well. It is not clear whether moving a work item would be allowed.
>> However, the target project of a move might not allow the work item type of
>> the moved work items, so at least we can say that it is not always
>> possible.
>> - Partition
>> Since we expect to have a very large number of work items and links
>> between them, we might have to partition the system in some way for
>> performance reasons. Keeping work items and links local to a project would
>> bring down the number of expected instances to a couple of 100k. Naively,
>> this would prevent us from doing work item links across project boundaries
>> and global searches (what are all the work items being blocked by this one?
>> What are all bugs filed by Max Andersen?). However, we could replicate
>> information of cross-item links in both projects. We could treat searches
>> across projects as a special case and offload it to a near-realtime
>> indexing service ("Google for mighti").
>> - Permissions
>> Projects are the object of permissions, meaning that permissions are
>> expressed in terms of projects: "Thomas is allowed to create issues in
>> Project 'ALM Core'".
>> - Team(s) container
>> One or more teams will be associated with the project. This is not
>> only a permission issue: one might use this for communication (team chat)
>> or to determine who a work item can be assigned to. At the same time groups
>> of users are traditionally what permissions are granted for. If we have
>> general notion of "groups of users", it would make sense to associate
>> multiple "teams" with a project: administrators, contributors, "guests",
>> etc. These groups would be created with the project and assigned a default
>> set of permissions.
>>
>> Other topics
>>
>> - Nested projects
>> https://github.com/almighty/almighty-core/issues/357 introduces the
>> notion of nested projects ("projects owning projects"). I am not sure where
>> in the PDD this is mandated. It would introduce complexity with permissions
>> and process configuration (unless they are a restricted form of project).
>> Unless necessary, I would not introduce this concept
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> almighty-public mailing list
>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Len DiMaggio (ldimaggi at redhat.com)
> JBoss by Red Hat
> 314 Littleton Road
> Westford, MA 01886 USA
> tel: 978.392.3179
> cell: 781.472.9912
> http://www.redhat.com
> http://community.jboss.org/people/ldimaggio
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> almighty-public mailing list
> almighty-public at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/almighty-public/attachments/20161031/5aa4d5cc/attachment.htm>
More information about the almighty-public
mailing list