8000 Standardize permission policy check logic · Issue #7206 · rucio/rucio · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Standardize permission policy check logic #7206

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
rdimaio opened this issue Dec 4, 2024 · 4 comments · Fixed by #7388
Closed

Standardize permission policy check logic #7206

rdimaio opened this issue Dec 4, 2024 · 4 comments · Fixed by #7388
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@rdimaio
Copy link
Contributor
rdimaio commented Dec 4, 2024
          However, checking the code, it seems this is not uses consistently.

lib/rucio/core/permission/__init__.py has in fact complex logic to determine the policy, but in several places in the code, a simple config_get("policy", "permission") is done instead.

Originally posted by @maxnoe in rucio/documentation#391 (comment)

See also: rucio/documentation#391 (comment)

@rdimaio
Copy link
Contributor Author
rdimaio commented Feb 13, 2025

To also fix: in https://rucio.github.io/documentation/operator/configuration_parameters/#policy, policy.permission says :permission: Same as policy/permission - so it autoreferences itself

@maxnoe
Copy link
Contributor
maxnoe commented Feb 13, 2025

@rdimaio
Copy link
Contributor Author
rdimaio commented Feb 13, 2025

Isn't this fixed? https://github.com/rucio/documentation/pull/391/files

Looks like it was accidentally added back here rucio/documentation@80a67a9

@rdimaio
Copy link
Contributor Author
rdimaio commented Feb 13, 2025

Quick PR to fix the doc issue rucio/documentation#473

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
No open projects
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants
0