[almighty] Multitenancy

[Monica Granfield]

One scenario to ask about here... around keeping status in sync with
multi-tenants.... Is this something that is good or has been thought about
at all?..

-Monica

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse at redhat.com>
wrote:

> On 23 Sep 2016, at 0:44, Andrew Lee Rubinger wrote:
>
> I think the question is about more than a URL scheme.
>>
>> We've been considering "Project" as our top-level container entity, but
>> there really exists "system" above that.
>>
>> By that measure, we can contain in a system:
>>
>> * Users
>> * Projects
>>
>> ...and then map permissions between users and roles at the project level.
>>
>> How does "Organization" map into that?
>>
>
> Good points and I like the notion of "system".
>
> The way GitHub and I think VSO does it is that Organizations are
> owners/containers of projects and users can also be owners.
> Which is why they often share namespace, i.e. cannot have both a user and
> org called "maxandersen".
>
> /max
>
>
>> S,
>> ALR
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Todd Mancini <tmancini at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> It's not clear to me what URLs have to do with multi-tenancy. The VSTS
>>> approach (which is actually one "org" per FQDN, but with infinite
>>> projects per org) was chosen for technical reasons, not product
>>> management ones.
>>>
>>> So, do you have a technical preference?
>>>
>>> The GitHub model seems to work well. But since we also plan to handle
>>> enterprise SSO (via SAML, for example), the Gmail model also works well
>>> (as far as PM is concerned). I'm not married to particular URL schemes.
>>>
>>> Sent from my phone, so anticipate hilarious autocorrectsFrom: Max
>>> Rydahl Andersen
>>> Sent: ‎9/‎22/‎2016 6:24 PM
>>> To: Andrew Lee Rubinger
>>> Cc: ALMighty-public
>>> Subject: Re: [almighty] Multitenancy
>>> On 22 Sep 2016, at 21:08, Andrew Lee Rubinger wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Baiju Muthukadan
>>>> <bmuthuka at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> ALMighty architecture is going to support Multitenancy, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> To the bone, yes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> what is unclear though is how the multi tenancy will work.
>>>
>>> i.e. is it like github/jira where one instance under one url has many
>>> projects with shared users/orgs
>>> or is it more like VSO where each domain has one project with users
>>> shared across many domains.
>>>
>>> Eagerly waiting for some of the "new project" PDD/UX stories to actually
>>> start getting that settled down.
>>>
>>> /max
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Baiju M
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Red Hat Developer Programs Architecture
>>>> @ALRubinger
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> /max
>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Red Hat Developer Programs Architecture
>> @ALRubinger
>>
>
>
>
>
> /max
> http://about.me/maxandersen
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160926/4b13dc97/attachment.htm>