Skip to content
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

[WIP] Allow filtering of Role Assignment lists by ansible_id #379

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: devel
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AlanCoding
Copy link
Member

Previously, we added ansible_id and user_ansible_id as strictly writable fields (also same for team) for assigning a role to a user.

This bakes this relationship into the models so that a client can use it to filter the entries, like:

{
    "count": 3,
    "next": null,
    "previous": null,
    "results": [
        {
            "id": 1,
            "url": "/api/v1/role_user_assignments/1/",
            "related": {
                "created_by": "/api/v1/users/1/",
                "role_definition": "/api/v1/role_definitions/1/",
                "user": "/api/v1/users/5/",
                "content_object": "/api/v1/organizations/1/"
            },
            "summary_fields": {
                "created_by": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "username": "_system",
                    "first_name": "",
                    "last_name": ""
                },
                "resource": {
                    "ansible_id": "c2b44764-3deb-4daf-a6cc-d2476cab6fbc",
                    "resource_type": "shared.organization"
                },
                "role_definition": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "name": "organization-admin",
                    "description": "",
                    "managed": true
                },
                "user": {
                    "id": 5,
                    "username": "org_admin",
                    "first_name": "",
                    "last_name": ""
                },
                "content_object": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "name": "AWX_community"
                }
            },
            "created": "2024-05-08T20:47:54.023629Z",
            "created_by": 1,
            "content_type": "shared.organization",
            "object_id": "1",
            "resource": "c2b44764-3deb-4daf-a6cc-d2476cab6fbc",
            "role_definition": 1,
            "user": 5,

Filtering:

http://127.0.0.1:8000/api/v1/role_user_assignments/?resource__ansible_id=c2b44764-3deb-4daf-a6cc-d2476cab6fbc

And again, the writable fields are:

Screenshot from 2024-05-08 16-49-59

TODO: the user and team fields should be blank/null, and the screenshot shows that's not working.

So we will move away from object_ansible_id (which is a UUID/string field) and towards the resource field which is relational. With this, more things will "just work".

This was not done before, because generalized filtering wasn't implemented at that time, and I thought "resource" was confusing. But now this PR matches the already-implemented general filtering. FYI @newswangerd . In other words, compare to:

http://127.0.0.1:8000/api/v1/organizations/?resource__ansible_id=c2b44764-3deb-4daf-a6cc-d2476cab6fbc

This URL discovers the object that the assignment applies to. Importantly, for the API contract, it uses the same query string.

@john-westcott-iv john-westcott-iv changed the title Allow filtering of Role Assignment lists by ansible_id [WIP] Allow filtering of Role Assignment lists by ansible_id May 9, 2024
@AlanCoding
Copy link
Member Author

Another TODO: Write migration to add the resource link on role assignments that already list

TODO of slightly similar scope: change migration utility give_permission to associate the resource if it exists as well.

@AlanCoding
Copy link
Member Author

AlanCoding commented May 10, 2024

TODO: #385 server error from not separating lookup kwargs from default kwargs

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant