[IPT] Functionality request: ADMIN checking data before GBIFregistration

[Mihail-Constantin Carausu]

I believe that the IPT ADMIN/MANAGER level control is now resolved with the
proposed functionality of "a) The preference would be to allow the ADMIN to
provide Registration privileges to individual MANAGERS ".

When a node manager endorses an institution can decide within the IPT
installation a configuration model giving the institutional data provider
the top Admin privileges or the Manager privileges with or without
Registration privilege.
However, in my opinion the hole idea of endorsement of an institution with
it¹s own provider means actually that  subsequent datasets to be
automatically detected and harvested, without the Node manager intervention
for each of them.

These user rights endorsements are much more powerful implemented at the
registry level, of course. But in this case where is going to be maintained
all these users and their rights: centrally, within the registry or at the
Node manager/IPT level or both places like it looks it will be the case now?
It is no doubt for me that the user rights implementation at the registry
level is much more powerful but the maintenance of all of the subsequent
users can be an overkill and has to be taken into account for the registry
development. 

Mihail

On 9/15/10 13:37 PM, "Tim Robertson (GBIF)" <trobertson at gbif.org> wrote:

> I missed this one in my previous response,
> 
> This relates to the endorsement model employed in GBIF.  Currently a Node is
> required to endorse an Institution, after which any resources made available
> through that institution are automatically picked up and indexed in the global
> portal.
> 
> This discussion actually goes beyond the scope of the IPT, and into the
> Registry as Dag and Hannu hint at.  For the purposes of the IPT, I believe the
> proposed functionality of "a) The preference would be to allow the ADMIN to
> provide Registration privileges to individual MANAGERS " would satisfy the
> level of control needed in an IPT installation, but that we need to consider
> the cascading endorsement model further in the registry - e.g. when a node
> manager endorses an Institution, should subsequent datasets be automatically
> detected and harvested, or should a Node manager be offered that fine grained
> control.
> 
> If my understanding above captures this correctly, could I please propose that
> the IPT ADMIN/MANAGER level control is resolved, but this requirement be
> captured for the Registry development?  Your advice on this is greatly
> appreciated!
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 15, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Hannu Saarenmaa wrote:
> 
>> Both of these suggestions will probably work fine. But controlling things at
>> the registry as Dag suggest might be more powerful.  I just want to be able
>> to check in advance what resources gets listed on Data Portal for our
>> institution.  Blocking publishing at IPT may not achieve this, if there are
>> multiple servers, like there is.
>> 
>> Hannu
>> 
>> On 2010-09-15 10:56, Dag Terje Filip Endresen wrote:
>>> Hi Tim and Hannu,
>>> 
>>> Would it be useful to register this setting for the data provider to the
>>> GBRDS - so that the NODE can set a "default" permission that will allow the
>>> data provider to install an independent IPT instance to publish from if they
>>> wish to. So that the data hosting center can host datasets from distributed
>>> data providers that themselves may want to "upgrade" to have their own IPT
>>> later on. The NODE admin could thus get an overview of resources endorsed by
>>> the NODE from the GBRDS...?
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> Dag
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Tim Robertson (GBIF) [mailto:trobertson at gbif.org]
>>>> To: ipt at lists.gbif.org
>>>> Sent: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:43:28 +0200
>>>> Subject: [IPT] Functionality request: ADMIN checking data before GBIF
>>>> registration
>>>> 
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Hannu has raised a request for the following to be satisfied by the IPT:
>>>> "- Publishing a resource must be accepted by the owner of the
>>>> provider. It has happened that a test user publishes something odd
>>>> which goes all the way to the data portal without nobody controlling
>>>> it."
>>>> 
>>>> This is a contradiction to the requests of others, and specifically
>>>> those wishing to promote basic "data hosting centers", who request
>>>> that a data MANAGER should be able to work autonomously.
>>>> 
>>>> After discussion with the developers the proposal is to implement the
>>>> following, which we hope satisfies both requirements:
>>>> In the Administration section, an ADMIN can choose to enable or
>>>> disable the ability for MANAGERS to register resources with GBIF. By
>>>> default MANAGERS can register a resource, but an ADMIN can disable
>>>> this through this check box.
>>>> 
>>>> If anyone has any concerns or comments on this approach, please can
>>>> you raise them on this list?
>>>> 
>>>> Many thanks,
>>>> Tim
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> IPT mailing list
>>>> IPT at lists.gbif.org
>>>> http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/ipt
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IPT mailing list
>>> IPT at lists.gbif.org
>>> http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/ipt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.gbif.org/pipermail/ipt/attachments/20100916/a57c4c05/attachment-0001.html