Skip to content

Attempt to enforce role name uniqueness #532

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

2 participants

@macintux
Basho Technologies member

One proposal for coping with naming conflicts between groups and users for purposes of granting permissions: don't allow conflicts (so far as we can determine).

When strong consistency comes to cluster metadata, we can enforce this more strongly, but for now we can supplement this by adding documentation instructing ops not to create groups and users by the same name.

/cc @Vagabond

@macintux
Basho Technologies member

This PR will probably be rejected in favor of #533

@jrwest jrwest modified the milestone: 2.0.1, 2.0-RC Mar 24, 2014
@jrwest
jrwest commented Mar 24, 2014

For the same reason as other security/bucket-type buckets found by @macintux, this has been marked for milestone 2.0-RC

EDIT: wrong milestone, was 2.0.1, meant 2.0-RC

@macintux
Basho Technologies member

This can be closed now. #533 has separated the concepts so name uniqueness is no longer required.

@macintux macintux closed this Mar 24, 2014
@macintux macintux deleted the jrd-security-role-uniqueness branch Mar 24, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.