Hi there ! On Fri, 11 Dec 2015 22:31:23 +0700 Cédric Krier <cedric.kr...@b2ck.com> wrote:
> On 2015-12-11 09:30, Luis Falcon wrote: > > > > > > I don't agree to remove access rights from the base. I think if > > > they are well define they will match most of the needs. It is > > > done like that in Tryton. If for a local installation, someone > > > need some access right tuning, he still can by adding new records > > > (that's why a default access right is needed). > > > > > Then might as well we leave it the way it is, and we can de-activate > > the demo users. > > I think you did not understand me. > I think it is good to have default access rights with pre defined > group (people are free to use such groups or not) but it is not good > to have predefined users as you can not change the password or > anything else. Yes. That's why I'm proposing leaving the definition of the access groups, and removing / deactivating the demo users. > > For the cage model, the problem is to define what is the default > access right (for user without any group) and is there other group > that should have more access rights than the default. > OK.
pgppz2N2jVo2M.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
