While apporaching to make a new network in Hyperledger fabric with user input of how many organization he wants in an network. how can i do this and what should be my approach to do this.
My, solution to this problem is to modify "config_tx.yaml" and adding as many organization object to it using yq and jq parsers but this seems impossible to achieve as command getting to much complex. any other solution to this please help.
Related
This is my first post/question. If I missed an existing thread that answers my question, I missed that thread in my search and definitely appreciate you linking me! Please let me know if I should be posting/asking this elsewhere....
My question relates to Salesforce.
I have a use case where a client has a monthly batch of files that need to be made available on various cloud-based storage/distribution platforms like Box and Dropbox but also other less ubiquitous tools specific to the sector. Currently, the client is logging into each distribution platform, one-at-a-time, and uploading the files; then, if at any point any files need to be updated or removed/restricted, the client logs into each platform one-by-one and takes the necessary action. Obviously the process being described is tedious/laborious and leaves multiple gaps for error. The client and I are discussing a solution that would allow for create/read/update/delete actions in all of the distribution platforms without having to leave their Salesforce org. I am aware of existing AppExchange integrations for Box, Dropbox, etc. but they don’t quite do everything we need (to my knowledge)—they tie-in nicely and there are use cases where they are powerful tools...but—my understanding of those existing integration is that they would still each require dedicated tabs within the Object and repeated ‘drags’ and ‘drops’ of the same files to each tab. Again, the end goal here is that, for example, the client wants to drag and drop one time and have it pushed to the various platforms, etc. Or another example is they would like to choose "delete" one time from within Salesforce and have the file removed/restricted on all distribution platforms.
I am a certified SF Admin 1, so...perhaps this should be in my wheelhouse but...I feel unsure how to approach. My feeling is this is asking for a combination of integrations via API and Process/Flow work, but I am hoping for some ideas/input/guidance. Any insight or help any of you have to offer would be so greatly appreciated!!
Thanks so much!
Could someone explain the process to enable authorization in Uber Cadence? I would like a detailed explanation because I'm very confused with this topic and how to solve it.
Thank you in advance
After https://github.com/uber/cadence/issues/2833 , Cadence has a AuthN interface and already plumbed through the system. However, it requires users to implement the interface and then re-compile the binary to use(internally this is how Uber uses it). This is not convenient because users have to make code change.
It's been becoming more frequent asks recently. I open this issue to track the feature. We probably can prioritize it in next quarters.
Is there a way to see what role has been assigned to either local and remote (LDAP) users. For example, I want to see which users in an LDAP infrastructure have the nx-admin role assigned.
I've been looking via google and in the Nexus documentation, but haven't had much luck yet. I know I can check to see if a specific user has a role, but this isn't a scalable solution.
Thank you
There is no current way to do this. File an issue at: https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/NEXUS if you would, this sounds like a logical piece of functionality :)
The project I'm currently working on is split up in an admin console and the normal frontend.
Both front and backend are in the same Laravel instance.
In the frontend I'm trying to create a user login system that works exclusively for the frontend. It uses a different table and model and it has different relations as oposed to the User model for the admin.
What I can't figure out is a way to use the Laravel Auth class for both systems. Logically Auth uses one single config file, and more to the point, one session name.
One solution that has been brought forward is not to use a different table and model and use some form of acl for the distinction. But I don't like the idea of mixing frontend and backend in this way. Especially because it would mean I'd suddenly have to give the admin User model all the fields and relations previously unique to the frontend user.
It just doesn't seem the right way to do things. I could switch to a different authentication system or seperate the admin into a package with its own configs but the scope of the project doesn't allow for such timeconsuming changes.
I'd welcome any idea's you could provide.
This is a problem that I encountered recently too. The whole separate environment wasn't very easy, especially if you already have development and production environments.
I did however spend some time creating a package to solve this problem, which you can find at https://github.com/ollieread/multiauth. The package itself is essentially a factory class for Auth, that allows you to use multiple instances of it, so you access it like so:
Auth::admin()->check();
Auth::user()->check();
Auth::whatever()->check();
I hope the package helps you or anyone else looking for this approach.
I'm not sure, but maybe it's useful. Why not try to create to separate environment for admin. And then you will have something like app/config/admin/session.php and app/config/session.php for production(which is the default environment).
You can see here how to setup environments http://andrewelkins.com/programming/php/how-to-set-laravel-4-environments/
But as I said it's just an idea, I'm not quite sure of it :)
Sounds like you should consider splitting the app into two codebases if the different user entities rarely or never need to see the same interface. They would still query the same database obviously.
Not only will this solve your auth issues, but also make maintaining the code a heck of a lot easier. For example, while pushing updates to the admin console you would only need to put that app in maintenance mode while keeping the (presumably) more critical frontend up and running.
In GitHub for organizations is there a way to see how your org is doing on all of its milestones at once, as opposed to having to browse into each repo and click issues->milestones and only seeing that one?
If this is impossible from the interface I might go and set up an API-based solution if that's the only way.
I don't think it's possible from the interface, but it does look doable from the API.
You'll need to do a GET /user/repos and from the returned JSON Array do a GET /repos/:user/:repo/milestones on each repo.
As far as I know, the issue tracker is the same for both regular users and enterprise users. And regular users cannot browse all their issues in the same time.
So you probably need to play around with GitHub Issues API to get what you want.
DataHero does that! It can pull in all the issues across all repos for an organization.
We use DataHero internally to plot our progress on individual milestones, and across all milestones.
https://datahero.com/partners/github/
How we use it internally:
https://datahero.com/blog/2013/08/13/managing-github-projects-with-datahero/
Feel free to reach out if I can help in any way.
Disclosure: I work for DataHero