locked
Cumulative security role for several solutions RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi all,

    I think I can't find the right answer to my problem myself.

    There are three solutions (A, B, C), two of which can only be deployed with the first but are not dependent one on another.

    In other words, the deployment order is [A] or [A + B] or [A +C] or [A + B + C]. Let's call [B] and [C] solutions with some extra functionality (the only things they have are some new entities which use some stuff from [A])

    The [A] solution has two security roles - 'CRM Admin' and 'Manager'. I need somehow to extend those roles for [B] and [C] and set rules there for their custom entities.

    I suspect the right way is to inherit the roles in unmanaged versions of [B] and [C] and modify them (B and C of course are deployed on different dev orgs as unmanaged and have managed [A] bases). So after that there will be three alternatives of each role. But I can't figure out what will happen if I try then to deploy A -> B -> C as managed ones on a new org. Will these two roles have the changes from [B] considering [C]is going to be deployed last ?

    If the way is not right, what do I do? Will creating a separate roles for each solution be the better option then?



    • Edited by MervinHut Wednesday, October 23, 2013 8:54 PM
    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 8:53 PM

Answers

  • Hi.

    If that is the case, I may just use separate roles for [B] and [C]. Make sure role settings are targeted to only the solution it belongs to. This may make future release and upgrade a lot easier for either [B] or [C]

    Jaimie

    • Marked as answer by MervinHut Wednesday, October 23, 2013 10:06 PM
    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 10:01 PM

All replies

  • I would have preferred to create separate roles for each solution for easy maintenance

    If my response helps you in finding your answer then please click 'Mark as Answer' and 'Vote as Helpful'

    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:13 PM
  • Hi

    Is there a reason why you need to separate [B] and [C] here? I would think it will be better if you can combine [B] and [C] into one solution since they seem to have some shared components there.

    Normally when deploying separate CRM solutions as managed, they should not overlap with each other in any possible ways to make future release and maintenance much easier.

    Regards,

    Jaimie


    • Edited by Jaimie Ji Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:43 PM
    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:43 PM
  • Hi

    Is there a reason why you need to separate [B] and [C] here? I would think it will be better if you can combine [B] and [C] into one solution since they seem to have some shared components there.

    Normally when deploying separate CRM solutions as managed, they should not overlap with each other in any possible ways to make future release and maintenance much easier.


    Hi, we can treat [B] and [C] as separate modules which are deployed (or not) depending on how much money a customer can offer :)

    They don't intersect and have nothing in common but some components from [A]. (they actually use a couple of N:N relationships from [A] in their entities as well as some JS-code)

    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:54 PM
  • Hi.

    If that is the case, I may just use separate roles for [B] and [C]. Make sure role settings are targeted to only the solution it belongs to. This may make future release and upgrade a lot easier for either [B] or [C]

    Jaimie

    • Marked as answer by MervinHut Wednesday, October 23, 2013 10:06 PM
    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 10:01 PM
  • Mamatha, Jaimie

    Thanks a lot, I'll follow your advice and do as you suggested

    Wednesday, October 23, 2013 10:06 PM