OK, I have updated the ui to reflect what was discussed here. I think the
end result is much more intuitive. Updated screen shots and patch on the
proposal.
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Andrea Aime
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >> The only thing that perplexes me a bit is the GUI workflow, I guess it
>> >> would
>> >> be better to have a flag that enables/disables custom workspace config
>> >> instead,
>> >> and a way to "save and continue" in case the admin can access multiple
>> >> workspaces.
>> >
>> > Agreed, I couldn't think of a great way to present this, but yeah... a
>> > checkbox would make more sense than what is there now.
>>
>> Maybe just disable everything unless the checkbox is enabled.
>> You should be able to get there by wrapping everything in a web markup
>> container and enable/disable it using the ajax event form control
>> behavior.
>>
> Yeah, that was the idea.
>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Also, what would be the workflow for a admin that can only access
>> >> specific workspaces,
>> >> and probably not the main configuration=
>> >
>> > I wonder... instead of trying to hijack the existing page should we
>> perhaps
>> > add workspace specific service config to the workspace edit page?
>> Basically
>> > underneath the namespace ui, default checkbox, etc... have a list of the
>> > services that have been customized for the workspace, with the ability
>> to
>> > add/remove new ones, etc... Thoughts on that?
>>
>> It would make sense, it gets pretty obvious that the configs are there.
>> At the same time if an admin can only access only a specific workspace
>> the main links in the sidebar would be pretty confusing, a nicer workflow
>> for that case would be that the main link would directly bring you to that
>> service config for that specific workspace
>>
>
> Agreed. I was thinking we would wither (a) disable the links in the main
> sidebar or (b) switch them to the workspace specific ones. (b) would be
> ideal, (a) is naturally easier. There is also the issue of what to do when
> the user has access to multiple workspaces... which one takes precedence?
>
> This issue overlaps with the finer grained admin security work that is
> going on at the moment in parallel. I think I may try to tackle this one as
> part of that proposal.
>
> So... for this proposal how about just going with the links to the
> services on the workspace edit page? If we have that do we need to the
> checkbox on the service config page? Probably just want
> some indication that the config is workspace specific... but that can be
> done with a simple label.
>
> And as part of the second proposal deal with having the main links in the
> side bar go to the config for the workspace(s) the admin actually has
> access to?
>
>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
>> Tech lead
>>
>> Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
>> 55054 Massarosa (LU)
>> Italy
>>
>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>> fax: +39 0584 962313
>>
>> http://www.geo-solutions.it
>> http://geo-solutions.blogspot.com/
>> http://www.youtube.com/user/GeoSolutionsIT
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/andreaaime
>> http://twitter.com/geowolf
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Justin Deoliveira
> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>
>
--
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Save $700 by Nov 18
Register now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
