RE: Preferred approach to extend Authkit to resource level access-control

Hi Jeremy, The easiest solution is to name your roles with the resource they apply to. Say you have resources r1, r2, and r3 you could name your roles: r1-edit r2-edit r3-edit r1-write r2-write etc As long as you don't use ``-`` characters elsewhere in the role name this works fine. You then ju

Re: Preferred approach to extend Authkit to resource level access-control

Thanks - this is useful. However, my concern is that there could ultimately be a very large number of resources and I wonder what the performance repercussions would be of just using the roles as is. Any thoughts? Thanks, Jeremy On Jun 16, 2008, at 4:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi

Re: Preferred approach to extend Authkit to resource level access-control

AIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 07:48:02 -0700 To: pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Preferred approach to extend Authkit to resource level access-control Thanks - this is useful. However, my concern is that there could ultimately be a very large number of resources and I w