It's all about the answers!

Ask a question
QuestionsTagsUsersBadges
Guidelines | FAQ
Follow this question
Question details

×42,884

question asked: Nov 12 '08, 11:48 a.m.
question was seen: 5,761 times
last updated: Nov 12 '08, 11:48 a.m.

Related questions

Is it possible to generally restrict access to source code m

0
Brian Gillan (321●53●30) | asked Nov 12 '08, 11:48 a.m.
For some initial deployments we want to restrict use for basically
planning... no source code development. I thought use of contributor
versus developer licenses might allow this, but after looking at the
differences between what these licenses provide, I don't think it give
the level if separation we're interested in. For example, I assume
someone with contributor license can't update iteration plans and such.
Am I wrong here, or would using license types give the level of
separation desired, or is there another way to achieve this easily with
process configuration?

Thanks, Brian

2 answers

Most liked answers ↑|Newest answers|Oldest answers

0
permanent link
Jared Burns (4.5k●2●9) | answered Nov 17 '08, 4:38 p.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
I'm not sure how the licenses interact with planning, but in the process
configuration, you can remove the permissions related to source control.
Open your project area and go to the Process Configuration tab. Select
the Permissions node under Team Configuration and then scroll through
the pane on the right to the "Source Control" section. This will show
the SCM permissions that you can control.

Jared Burns
Jazz Process Team


Brian Gillan wrote:
For some initial deployments we want to restrict use for basically
planning... no source code development. I thought use of contributor
versus developer licenses might allow this, but after looking at the
differences between what these licenses provide, I don't think it give
the level if separation we're interested in. For example, I assume
someone with contributor license can't update iteration plans and such.
Am I wrong here, or would using license types give the level of
separation desired, or is there another way to achieve this easily with
process configuration?

Thanks, Brian
0
permanent link
Dirk Baeumer (481●1) | answered Nov 21 '08, 12:08 p.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER
Hi Brian,

regarding your planning questions: a user with a contributor license can
modify plans since he is allowed to modify work items and plans are in
terms of the work items which are on the plan a simple work item query.

If you want to restrict write access to plans to a certain group of
developers you have to restrict write access for the work item
attributes that affect planning (e.g category, planned For) as well as
for the iteration plan save operation in the process spec. That should
give you the desired behavior.

Dirk Baeumer
Agile Planning Component

Brian Gillan wrote:
For some initial deployments we want to restrict use for basically
planning... no source code development. I thought use of contributor
versus developer licenses might allow this, but after looking at the
differences between what these licenses provide, I don't think it give
the level if separation we're interested in. For example, I assume
someone with contributor license can't update iteration plans and such.
Am I wrong here, or would using license types give the level of
separation desired, or is there another way to achieve this easily with
process configuration?

Thanks, Brian

Your answer

Register or to post your answer.


Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.