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
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
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