[almighty] Multitenancy

[Todd Mancini]

My $0.02.

1. When we say 'status change', we need to be careful. If I have a WI open
for full details and I change basically anything, nothing is persisted
until I click Save. (This gives me the option to cancel.) But in other
parts of the UI, say, moving a card on a Kanban board from 1 column to
another -- that would be an immediate update. I'm not saying anyone is
confused by this, but it never hurts to restate it. :)
2. All WIs have a Status as far as I know, so I don't think we need to
talk about "WIs with a status", because that suggests that some do not.
3. Auto-updating UIs when someone/something changes something -- in
general, sure, this is nice to have (say, via WebSockets). But I would call
this out as low priority for our first release.

   -Todd

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Monica Granfield <mgranfie at redhat.com>
wrote:

> Sure... if a WI has a status, and the status changes, will it immediately
> persist and be updated anywhere that WI is viewed. In the past I have run
> into scenarios about concurrency with objects based on how multi-tenancy is
> structured. So just want to ask if all data is live or will require updates
> to see current statuses, states or otherwise...?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Andrew Lee Rubinger <alr at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 26, 2016 5:01 PM, "Monica Granfield" <mgranfie at redhat.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > 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?..
>>
>> I am not sure I understand the question, Monica.  Could you elaborate?
>>
>> >
>> > -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
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160927/f89524ae/attachment.htm>