[10:28:54 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> TonyUnicon saw your student perms question on sss-dev. i'm going to have to defer to russ on that one
[10:29:42 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> i agree that a student role seems like a no-brainer, but on the finer-grained access questions, i think russ is the one who'll know how that should work
[10:29:55 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> yeah I figured as much
[10:29:58 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> heh
[10:30:32 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> i dont think permissions will be controversial but it never hurts to ask first
[10:30:43 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> yep. and thx for putting it on ssp-dev
[10:31:10 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> i see we have at least one non-Unicon client considering deployment. so keeping discussion in public like that does have value
[10:31:59 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> yeah I think so, if for anything people can trace being and look at the reasoning beside the decisions made
[10:32:07 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> being=back
[10:32:24 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> yep
[10:32:42 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> right now I'm just having a look at how the permissions are implemented
[10:33:06 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> permissions/roles
[10:33:13 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> k
[10:34:14 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> i think the main thing on the SSP side is that it doesn't really ever check 'roles' in the uP groups sense… think it's always checking uP permissions, which get mapped one-to-one to spring security roles/grantedauthorities
[10:48:12 CST(-0600)] <TonyUnicon> but the roles are a collection of permissions essentially?
[10:48:21 CST(-0600)] <dmccallum54> correct