Re: [wsrp] Issue #33: Pass UserContext to lifetime operations?

[Rich Thompson <richt2@us.ibm.com>]

If the Consumer is free to reuse the
resource for multiple users (allowed for both registrations and portlets),
then allowing the Producer to base the lifetime on user related values
would introduce a fundamental clash.

Rich

Michael Freedman <Michael.Freedman@oracle.com>

12/22/2004 01:25 PM

To	wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
cc
Subject	Re: [wsrp] Issue #33: Pass UserContext to lifetime operations?

So I [producer] can't have policies that assign different
lifetimes passed on user category or profile information?  Certainly
not a common use but why would we prevent?
     -Mike-

Rich Thompson wrote:

I would argue against the lifetime operations taking a user context as
the underlying resources are not user-specific and the Consumer is the
right control point for deciding whether or not the end-user is allowed
to see or impact the lifetime. 

Rich

Andre Kramer <andre.kramer@eu.citrix.com>

12/22/2004 10:34 AM

To	Rich Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "'wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org'" <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	RE: [wsrp] Issue #33: Pass UserContext to lifetime operations?

I had considered portlet handle leasing ops taking in a user context but
then the question of whether a consumer leases on a per user basis would
arise. The call arg would then typically set to null, as seems to happen
a lot given the questions surrounding userContexts in operations. But easy
to add if we think it is required for consistency.
  
Regards, 
Andre

---

From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
Sent: 21 December 2004 16:55
To: wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsrp] Issue #33: Pass UserContext to lifetime operations?
  

Issue # 33 
Spec section: 
SubCommittee: Interfaces 
Owner: Andre 
Description: Should
the RegistrationLifetime and PortletLifetime portTypes' operations take
a userContext for consistency?