These are chat archives for allegro/ralph

23rd
Oct 2015
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 08:28
Data center asset has no relation to person. I'd like to bind administrators to assets. Are you considering adding something similar?
damian1976
@damian1976
Oct 23 2015 08:46
This kind of relation was implemented in 2.x. I don't remember why but it seems it's been abandoned in 3.x. Guys should (or not) confirm that.
Mateusz Kurek
@mkurek
Oct 23 2015 08:48
@msuszko this could be done right now but not directly - you could assign Service to Asset, Team to Service, and User to Team - is this flow ok for you?
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 08:52
i would rather stay with current model object, but change how it's displayed
previously we were showing "Support Group" inline, on ther Device view which was sufficient
Mateusz Kurek
@mkurek
Oct 23 2015 08:55
@vi4m of course - my question was rather if @msuszko could assign some service to asset and them user to this team (which could be one-person-only in extreme case)
and i forgot about business owners and technical owners, which could be assigned to service - so there is no need to involve team here :)
damian1976
@damian1976
Oct 23 2015 08:57
I think @msuszko rather meant "User Info" section in Asset add/edit form, not Support Group. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 08:57
@mkurek could you assign person to a support?
Mateusz Kurek
@mkurek
Oct 23 2015 08:58
@msuszko afaik no - why you want to assign a person to a support?
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 08:59
@damian1976 Yes, I'm looking for assigning person to a data center asset as it is done with back office asset
damian1976
@damian1976
Oct 23 2015 09:00
@mkurek, once you described me why in 3.x this info has been discarded. I don't remember the reasons why.
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 09:01
My security department is looking for a way to address vulnerability scan results, they need to identify person administering system with specific IP
Mateusz Kurek
@mkurek
Oct 23 2015 09:06
@msuszko @damian1976 it useless (at least from our point of view) to assign single person to a single person - we rather prefer to assign person to service and then this service to asset; advantage of this flow is when the person is gone or the owner is changed - then you're just replacing it in one place, not in every asset; the only problem which I see here is when there is more than one person administering servers within one service - is it your case @msuszko (and @damian1976 too)?
damian1976
@damian1976
Oct 23 2015 09:09
It happens quite often. But from my point of view - a single person is enough. In the worst case this person can contact another person or provide the info who is really responsible for given servers.
So the given flow should be ok for me.
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 09:10
@msuszko we are in the middle of integration of similar product (security scanner) which will integrate with ralph
to dump scan results to the Security Tab
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 09:26
@msuszko what's the use case behing assigning each admin to each asset ? can't you identify service (for example data dabases: service name"DB", 4 assets assigned to this service, service owner: John)
when you grow bigger(more servers, more people) you will likely end up with this "service" oriented idea
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 10:54
@vi4m I'm quite big at the moment, and there is infrastructure support department with teams for each software/technology. Still, formal approach is to identify one person directly responsible for a host even he can share this with coworkers
Anyway, there is no way to add people though support either. One can only attach support to an asset.
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 11:01
we can think about that, how to solve it correctly
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 11:10
I could use support groups, the problem is there are no groups nor other way to attach people to support.
and most fields in support doesn't apply to sysops teams
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 11:12
no msuszko, current 'support' tab is a different beast from 'support groups'
the only way to set the person responsible for a server is to assign it to the asset's service
what will happen when we add another field for similar purpose - for example "Supporting person" "Responsible person"
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 11:17
we can assign it independent from service owner, but when this person leaves company, we have to change it in number of places
what's your idea for it?
Mateusz Kurek
@mkurek
Oct 23 2015 11:32
@msuszko so it'll be ok for you to attach Team to support? if yes then maybe you'll create PR for that (it should be only a couple of lines + migration) and we'll make sure that it is fine for us too (I don't see any objections now)?
Michał Suszko
@msuszko
Oct 23 2015 11:35
I could implement it and submit pull request, just need to agree with you on the details
✪ vi4m Marcin Kliks
@vi4m
Oct 23 2015 12:18
@mkurek keep it mind, that the Support wich is visible at Support tab is for asset manfuacturer support terms, which is not we're talking about here.