-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 333
WPB-20054 SCIM get group #4831
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
WPB-20054 SCIM get group #4831
Conversation
749ed7b to
b8db0dd
Compare
277dac2 to
638da63
Compare
42d669b to
797766b
Compare
bf8958c to
15ff839
Compare
c5929df to
69310c6
Compare
479d19e to
a81d162
Compare
- add `newUserGroup` helper to skip repeating `mempty` - in hscim.cabal, fix readme link and source-repository subdir
0b04971 to
e93e1a8
Compare
| CreateGroup creator newGroup -> createUserGroup creator newGroup | ||
| CreateGroupFull managedBy team mbCreator newGroup -> createUserGroupFullImpl managedBy team mbCreator newGroup | ||
| GetGroup getter gid includeChannels -> getUserGroup getter gid includeChannels | ||
| GetGroupUnsafe tid gid includeChannels -> getUserGroupUnsafe tid gid includeChannels |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just to check, is the reason to call this unsafe because we don't know nor check if the group is part of the team?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think team membership is guaranteed because of the database schema, but GetGroup also does access control checks: who's asking, and which users are they allowed to see in the member list?
|
Apparently, I can't approve it as I created this PR, nevertheless I approve! :) |
Checklist
changelog.d