Task #9290 (closed)
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
Bug: cli group creation
Reported by: | cblackburn | Owned by: | jamoore |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | critical | Milestone: | OMERO-4.4 |
Component: | OmeroPy | Version: | n.a. |
Keywords: | n.a. | Cc: | omero-team@… |
Resources: | n.a. | Referenced By: | n.a. |
References: | n.a. | Remaining Time: | 0.0d |
Sprint: | 2012-07-17 (19) |
Description
More of a check whether help needs updating than a bug,
jrs-macbookpro-25031:dist cblackburn$ bin/omero group add -h usage: bin/omero group add [-h] [--ignore-existing] [--perms PERMS | --type {private,read-only,collaborative}] name
does the help text need updating or the underlying flag value? ie collaborative to read-annotate
Change History (10)
comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by jmoore
- Cc eehill jburel added; jmoore removed
- Owner set to jmoore
- Priority changed from major to critical
comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by jmoore
- Cc omero-team@… added; eehill jburel removed
I put an initial version up on https://github.com/openmicroscopy/openmicroscopy/pull/228 for review. Still awaiting the new names. Primary question: Is "collaborative" rwrw or rwra (historically because we downgraded all rwrw groups to rwra, I would say that "collaborative" is rwra. But then what do we call rwrw?)
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by sylittlewood
I'd say that the names of group types should be short and concise as well as expressive for their purpose.
- private (rw----)
- read-only (rwr---)
- read-annotate (rwra--)
- read-write (rwrw--)
Drop the 'collaborative' nomenclature as it's kind of a given when it's not private. Having the term collaborative confuses things as it encompasses 3 group types now. My recommendation is to be specific and brief with naming.
comment:4 Changed 12 years ago by jmoore
Elwood, agreed. I guess my only concern was deprecating since "collaborative" was in the previous version. But certainly open either way.
comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by eehill
Whatever we have needs to be called the same thing everywhere, and I think Private, Collaborative: read-only & Collaborative: read-annotate is what is in the clients that we've got for 4.4 at the moment. We need to be consistent, but if there is no time to change, then this should be what we stick with.
comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by jmoore
No argument from me there, Emma. The questions are:
- do we still expose "collaborative" as deprecated (sounds like you'd prefer not to)
- do we expect users to type "Collaborative: read-only" on the command-line, or are there shorter versions we can use? (I've used just "read-only" etc. here)
comment:7 Changed 12 years ago by eehill
Josh, I think that is fine
comment:8 Changed 12 years ago by wmoore
I created a ticket (and PR) for dropping the "Collaborative" from webadmin group permission naming. #9324.
comment:9 Changed 12 years ago by jmoore
Yup, already merged for today's build.
comment:10 Changed 12 years ago by jmoore <josh@…>
- Remaining Time set to 0
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
(In [627e3e75975541bc67bb11801b88ee88565429eb/ome.git] on branch develop) Improve group names from bin/omero group (Fix #9290)
Thanks for the ticket, Colin. I have this on my last minute TODO list. Just waiting on Emma's suggestion for naming. The same goes for bin/omero group perms as well.