CKAN: Ticket #2550: User types

milestone changed

ross — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:33:45 GMT

milestone changed from ckan-v1.8 to datahub-july

owner, status changed

ross — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:16:29 GMT

owner changed from kindly to ross
status changed from new to accepted

Clarify

description changed

ross — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:43:41 GMT

description modified (diff)

description changed

ross — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:45:16 GMT

description modified (diff)

owner, status changed

icmurray — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:29:33 GMT

owner changed from ross to icmurray
status changed from accepted to assigned

status changed

icmurray — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:30:13 GMT

status changed from assigned to accepted

cc set

icmurray — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 17:09:30 GMT

cc ross added

I've done some initial work on this. I think the best way is to define extra tables in the datahub extension. (Rather than: using groups; or modifying the user table; or defining extras for users (in core)).

Initially, I've created a new domain object, PaidService?, which captures the different levels of account a user may have. And then attached users to this through a secondary table. I think the advantages of this approach are:

the PaidService? table can contain supplementary info about that account type: eg - amount of storage allowed; or cost to sign up etc...
allows us to use a modular payment system if biz decide that would be favourable. ie - users belong to multiple PaidServices? which are independant of one another, rather than a linear hierarcy (eg - "sign up for storage, but not for privacy" vs. "sign up for enterprise level rather than basic level")

The thing that's held me up today is being able to run tests: I'm having a sqlalchemy issue with defining extra mappings on the User table; which then gets dropped when initializing the test setup. I've gotten to the bottom of the problem, and will ask kindly's advice.

In the meantime, I could do with some user stories please. I think I have a fairly good idea of what's likely to be needed by this ticket; but to what extent should this be exposed to a sysadmin (adding payment schemes; adding users to payment schemes; users seeing which payemtn services they're paying for (public to other users or not?); user's seeing history of payments? sysadmins seeing list of users for each service level?) - should this be: through a dashboard? through paster commands? through the api? all 3?

Do we want modular payments or a linear hierarchy of payment schemes?

How does is this suppossed to fit in with organizations? Do organizations purchase on behalf of users as well as individuals being able to make purchases?

Do we need to be able to deativate a user's paid service if their payment hasn't come through?

description changed

ross — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:31:00 GMT

description modified (diff)

I think you've nailed the user stories already, but have added them to Description to be explicit.

rgrp — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:38:44 GMT

Sounds good. BTW all users stories if at all possible go in google docs now for permanence. Here is the template: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U5yahDrvp_PKQMNjzI_8u3xixnALf4eNZWK2BdTXOVw/edit

owner, priority, status, description changed

icmurray — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:10:56 GMT

owner changed from icmurray to ross
priority changed from awaiting triage to awaiting merge
status changed from accepted to assigned
description modified (diff)

Awaiting merge: https://github.com/okfn/ckanext-datahub/pull/1

owner changed

ross — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 10:51:37 GMT

owner changed from ross to icmurray

Reassigned to icmurray rather than back to backlog.