+1 for approach 2.
What will be a sample response for GET "
https://localhost:9443/scim2/Groups/c39232b1-4856-439b-89be-aae3fce5617d/permissions";
?
Thanks,
Thanuja
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:41 AM Dinali Dabarera wrote:
>
> Hi Denuwanthi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:37 AM Denuwanthi De Sil
Hi Denuwanthi,
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:37 AM Denuwanthi De Silva
wrote:
> +1 for Approach 2.
> It provides a sense of modularity/decoupling and helps the api user to
> easily navigate api calls using the provided link.
> Will this effort also cover associating permissions to roles?
>
I beli
+1 for Approach 2.
It provides a sense of modularity/decoupling and helps the api user to
easily navigate api calls using the provided link.
Will this effort also cover associating permissions to roles?
Thanks,
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:52 AM Dinali Dabarera wrote:
> Correction:
>
> *Approach
Correction:
*Approach 2:*
Ex:
{
"totalResults": 1,
"startIndex": 1,
"itemsPerPage": 1,
"schemas": [
"urn:ietf:params:scim:api:messages:2.0:ListResponse"
],
"Resources": [
{
"displayName": "PRIMARY/admin",
"meta": {
"created": "2019-07-26T19:33:54",
Hi all,
We currently have the UserAdmin Service method to return all the
permissions in the permission tree as a node list object. There is also a
method to return permissions associated with a role.
When we try to implement a rest API for this we came up with below two
approaches:
*Approach 1:*
