How can I have multiple classes of actors? #11

Closed
eric opened this Issue Oct 1, 2012 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@eric
Contributor

eric commented Oct 1, 2012

Some features should be enabled on a per-account basis, others on a per-user basis (where an account has multiple users).

How can I query and enable certain features by account and others by user?

@jnunemaker

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@jnunemaker

jnunemaker Oct 1, 2012

Owner

I tried to keep the idea of actor to be generic. What you use as your actor can be whatever makes sense for the feature. It could be tricky to use actors for both as they could have conflicting ids. That said, when I switch ids to be strings you could do your own concatentation trickery to make it work.

I'm certainly open to suggestions. I'm not quite using flipper in production yet, so there could be a few small things that are odd and need tweaked.

Owner

jnunemaker commented Oct 1, 2012

I tried to keep the idea of actor to be generic. What you use as your actor can be whatever makes sense for the feature. It could be tricky to use actors for both as they could have conflicting ids. That said, when I switch ids to be strings you could do your own concatentation trickery to make it work.

I'm certainly open to suggestions. I'm not quite using flipper in production yet, so there could be a few small things that are odd and need tweaked.

@eric

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@eric

eric Oct 1, 2012

Contributor

With rollout I just created two instances of the rollout object, one for each type, but that doesn't really make as much sense here, because the goal of flipper seems to be wider.

Thinking about it more, I guess there isn't anything preventing passing different kinds of objects as the actor to different named features, as long as you keep track of it in your app code, it shouldn't make a difference...

Contributor

eric commented Oct 1, 2012

With rollout I just created two instances of the rollout object, one for each type, but that doesn't really make as much sense here, because the goal of flipper seems to be wider.

Thinking about it more, I guess there isn't anything preventing passing different kinds of objects as the actor to different named features, as long as you keep track of it in your app code, it shouldn't make a difference...

@jnunemaker

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@jnunemaker

jnunemaker Oct 1, 2012

Owner

Yep, that is what I was poorly trying to say. Mixing them together on the same feature would be confusing currently due to forcing integers (without making the first or last significant or some kind of indicator).

Owner

jnunemaker commented Oct 1, 2012

Yep, that is what I was poorly trying to say. Mixing them together on the same feature would be confusing currently due to forcing integers (without making the first or last significant or some kind of indicator).

@jnunemaker

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@jnunemaker

jnunemaker Nov 14, 2012

Owner

Is it ok to close this issue? Or is there something we need to address other than documenting this?

Owner

jnunemaker commented Nov 14, 2012

Is it ok to close this issue? Or is there something we need to address other than documenting this?

@eric

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@eric

eric Nov 14, 2012

Contributor

I think documenting would be fine.

Contributor

eric commented Nov 14, 2012

I think documenting would be fine.

@jnunemaker jnunemaker closed this in 81cf275 Jan 1, 2013

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment