On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Chamila De Alwis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking into the possibility of using Rsync as a platform agnostic
> approach to manage deployment synchronization of artifacts that are
> dynamically generated in a containerized environment. The scenario I
> considered was
Hi Omindu,
Yes. We can't use reCaptcha without internet. But the chance of having Bots
attack from a internal network is very less. So we can either disable
reCaptcha when server is not connect to the internet or have the old
captcha implementation.
+1 for keep the existing captcha implementation
Sohani Weerasinghe
Senior Software Engineer
WSO2, Inc: http://wso2.com
Mobile : +94 716439774
Blog :http://christinetechtips.blogspot.com/
Twitter : https://twitter.com/sohanichristine
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Malaka Silva wrote:
> Hi Sohani,
>
> I guess we are dealing with option
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera wrote:
> Hi Isura,
>
> Since reCaptcha requires to call Google's services for captcha generation
> and validation, we won't be able to use the dashboard with captcha when we
> are running IS in an environment without internet connectivity.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Malaka Silva wrote:
> But optional Fields are something we need to handle at run time?
>
Actually there are several ways we could get optional elements. Some API's
will not send the optional elements if they are null or they will send
empty element with or withou
Another question, Is this going to work if we have to connect to a
read-only LDAP/A
D
userstore?
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Tanya Madurapperuma wrote:
> Is this model scalable? Because per dashboard we will have to create 4
> internal roles. So if we have N number of dashboards we will e
But optional Fields are something we need to handle at run time?
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Nuwan Pallewela wrote:
> Hi Malaka,
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Malaka Silva wrote:
>
>> Hi Sohani,
>>
>> I guess we are dealing with optional input/output here. So in that case
>> are we
Hi Malaka,
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Malaka Silva wrote:
> Hi Sohani,
>
> I guess we are dealing with optional input/output here. So in that case
> are we showing those in a different color or anyway to distinguish?
>
> On execution side this needs to be handled from data mapper mediator.
Hi Isura,
Since reCaptcha requires to call Google's services for captcha generation
and validation, we won't be able to use the dashboard with captcha when we
are running IS in an environment without internet connectivity. I'm
assuming we are not shipping the old captcha implementation in 5.3.0 so
Hi Sohani,
I guess we are dealing with optional input/output here. So in that case are
we showing those in a different color or anyway to distinguish?
On execution side this needs to be handled from data mapper mediator.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Sohani Weerasinghe wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> W
Hi Thilini,
+1 for this approach
Please see my comments inline
1. The generated download link is not secured since it is a one-time
download link. Is there a security concern regarding this approach?
There is no major security issue in this approach. I'm adding Prabath for
more ideas
2.
Hi,
I was looking into the possibility of using Rsync as a platform agnostic
approach to manage deployment synchronization of artifacts that are
dynamically generated in a containerized environment. The scenario I
considered was the artifact generation in the Gateway when an API is
published in th
Hi All,
We could not go for approach suggested by Sagara due to the reasons
explained by Lahiru in previous reply. We could go for what Dimuthu has
suggested (keep custom fields in a json string), but it will be difficult
to populate UI. Anyway if we cannot keep rxt metadata something like
follows
Is this model scalable? Because per dashboard we will have to create 4
internal roles. So if we have N number of dashboards we will end up having
4 * N number of internal roles.
@ IS team : is this approach fine? Or is there any better approach?
Thanks,
Tanya
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Nisa
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Thilini Shanika wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are planning to implement one-time app download link support for mobile
> application installation/download in App Manager 1.2.0. The main objective
> of introducing this feature is to overcome security issues with the curren
Hi All,
We are in a process of implementing the $subject and please find the
implementation details.
*Input*:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/";>
sample
011265565501
011265565501
After loading the above payload, the generated schema will be as follows
{
"$schema" : "http://json-schema.org/draft-
Hi all,
We are planning to implement one-time app download link support for mobile
application installation/download in App Manager 1.2.0. The main objective
of introducing this feature is to overcome security issues with the current
approach of installing mobile apps.
Below is the designed appro
>
> Initial discussion was to run this tasks at midnight, because all the
> substitution start at beginning of a day.
Ok, now I understand what you meant initially.
> Since we are moving to time-stamp based approach, we will not required to
> calculate this for all users; but calculate for some
Hi Manu,
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Manuranga Perera wrote:
> Let's say, engine hasn't received any new task creation requests
>> for
>> this particular user during T1-T5. Then engine will not able to reassign
>> above X tasks back to user B during this time period. But user B should
>
> Let's say, engine hasn't received any new task creation requests
> for
> this particular user during T1-T5. Then engine will not able to reassign
> above X tasks back to user B during this time period. But user B should
> able to
> perform
> above task after T1.
> This is why we can't
>
>
> There is no such status like "In progress".
>>
>> Isn't "claiming" a task is equivalent to making "in progress".
>
> In your example of call, I'll first claim and then start the call.
>
> No, Unclaimed tasks do not have an Assignee. We are talking about
> substituting assignees here.
Unclaim
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Manuranga Perera wrote:
> I think as much as possible we have to achieve this with Event-driven
>> architecture rather than schedulers.
>>
> +1
>
Let's take an example. Say we use event driven pattern here and we have
substitution from user A to user B which
is
> There is no such status like "In progress".
>
> Isn't "claiming" a task is equivalent to making "in progress".
>
> In your example of call, I'll first claim and then start the call.
>
No, Unclaimed tasks do not have an Assignee. We are talking about
substituting assignees here.
>
> On Mon, Jun
>
> There is no such status like "In progress".
Isn't "claiming" a task is equivalent to making "in progress".
In your example of call, I'll first claim and then start the call.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Manuranga Perera wrote:
> I think as much as possible we have to achieve this with
>
> I think as much as possible we have to achieve this with Event-driven
> architecture rather than schedulers.
>
+1
> So we can use simple cache mechanism as below
While this is possible, I don't see why we are trying to shave off a few
milliseconds from the task creation and make the it more c
adding Johan and Manuranga
Thanks,
Nisala
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Nisala Nanayakkara wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am working on implementing an access levels model for WSO2 Dashboard
> Server. Currently global permission model for create/delete/login is
> implemented by Megala. Since it does
Hi all,
I am working on implementing an access levels model for WSO2 Dashboard
Server. Currently global permission model for create/delete/login is
implemented by Megala. Since it does not support to provide per dashboard
level access for the users. I am going to extend it and implement a
permissi
27 matches
Mail list logo
