On 8/9/07, John Locke <..hidden..> wrote:
Chris Travers wrote:
>
> I think we should probably add some summary roles too which allow one
> to provide broad permissions across modules instead of having to
> create them all. Furthermore, we should be able to extend this (maybe
> in 1.4) to be able to define custom roles with certain permissions.
> Nothing is likely to prevent people from doing this themselves in 1.3,
> however.
>
> Any suggestions on summary roles are appreciated, however.
I'm thinking (partial list): "AP", "AR", "Cashier",
"Shipping/Receiving", "Bookkeeper", "Accountant", "HR", "Employee",
"Manufacturing", "Sales". That's what comes to mind...
>
> Yeah, we will need separate permissions for employees. Thanks. Will
> add (see the power of peer review?).
>
> Something like:
>
> EMPLOYEE:
>
> create_employee (member of create_contact)
> edit_employee (member of edit_contact)
> an ability to list employees is currently considered available to all
> users unless there are objections.
Hmm. I have worked in places where they don't want people to be able to
look up home numbers/addresses of other employees... Also possibly for
outsourced bookkeepers... I would think inheriting the read_contact
right should cover this case, maybe?
Ok. We may need to think about this some more. Certainly getting a list of names, id's, of employees is required by a surprising set of application functionality and we may not be able to address this in
1.3 using db-level permissions.
>
> The other suggestion I have is to have some sort of group
> functionality,
> so we don't need to configure every single user with each associated
> right. I'm thinking of groups such as "cashier", "shipping/receiving",
> "AP", etc, which can be associated with sets of rights. Then can add
> users to these groups and override individual permissions only if
> necessary. Maybe this is already planned?
>
>
> These will use DB roles, so permission is always cumulative.
>
> I don't think an easy way to add groups through the interface will be
> available in 1.3, probably will in 1.4, but I would expect it to be
> fairly easy in the implementation stage to add additional group roles
> for this version.
Sounds good!
We may or maynot have group functionality for 1.3 depending on how much gets done :-) Either way, I would expect it for
1.4....
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Cheers,
--
John Locke
"Open Source Solutions for Small Business Problems"
published by Charles River Media, June 2004
http://www.freelock.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>
http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-devel mailing list
..hidden..
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel