[Anthill-pro] Doubt / Possible bug

[Peter Steele]

It would be nice if security defaults could be defined in some cases.
For example, when we add agents we have to manually set the security for
each one. When you add one agent this isn't such a big deal. However,
when you add a dozen or more at one time, this gets to be pretty
tedious. I guess not many would have this problem on a regular basis so
I may be in the minority, but it would still be a nice feature.

-----Original Message-----
From: anthill-pro-bounces at lists.urbancode.com
[mailto:anthill-pro-bounces at lists.urbancode.com] On Behalf Of emerson
cargnin
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 4:50 AM
To: AnthillPro user and support list.; support at urbancode.com
Subject: [Anthill-pro] Doubt / Possible bug

In the past I only added security settings to the environment. I
noticed today that some servers just added to an existing environment
were not showing its name in the job execution report.

Then I noticed that those new agents didn't get any security
permissions on it (even then any user witht he env permission could
deploy to it).

Looking at the other agents, they had the same permission applied to
the environment.

What changed in the last release? I see the "Add Security on Agents".
Could you explain better how this works now?

I think the upgraded copied the environment setting to the agent.
Wouldn't be possible to have an option to replicate the settings as
well while in the environment security tab? This would save some
work....

Could you also explain what each permission will affect on the agent?
I suggested  already to add this on the documentation for all itams
that have security tab. Eg: what you can do/see if it has read/write/*
permissions

thanks
emerson
_______________________________________________
Anthill-pro mailing list
Anthill-pro at lists.urbancode.com
http://lists.urbancode.com/mailman/listinfo/anthill-pro