Grouper Developers Forum

[Shilen Patel <>]

>> If the attribute assign delete is guaranteed to be in the change log on group and folder deletes then I should be able to key off of that?

That's what I would do :) and have done with change log consumers I've built that sync based on attribute assignments.  Maybe Chris has other thoughts.

Thanks!

- Shilen

From: "<William G. Thompson>", "Jr." <>
Date: Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:25 PM
To: Shilen Patel <>
Cc: Grouper Dev <>
Subject: Re: [grouper-dev] PITGroup assigned attributes?

Removing the marker attribute from a group or folder would be saying I no longer want this group or set of groups provisioned to the target.  So that case would be a group delete at the target.

If the attribute assign delete is guaranteed to be in the change log on group and folder deletes then I should be able to key off of that?

Best,

Bill

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Shilen Patel <> wrote:

Sure, if that would make things easier for you.  Feel free to create a jira. :)

I think one issue with your PIT code is that the attribute may have been assigned to the group, but then later unassigned.  And then sometime (potentially long) after, the group was deleted.  You'd still see that the group had the attribute assigned in the past, but would have to look at the time or context to see if it was part of the group delete operation.

Though I'm wondering..  If your sync'ing is based on attribute assignments, I don't see change log events for assign adds and deletes.  When a group is deleted, if the attribute was assigned at the time of deletion, you'd get the attribute assign delete before the group delete.  So you'd know it was actually being sync'ed by the first event.  I'm guessing you'd still want to look at the group deletes too in case the folder (or ancestor folder) had the attribute.

Thanks!

- Shilen

From: "<William G. Thompson>", "Jr." <>
Date: Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 10:26 PM
To: Grouper Dev <>
Subject: Re: [grouper-dev] PITGroup assigned attributes?

For checking for the syncAttribute marker...

This is working for groups that are still in the registry.
group.getAttributeDelegate().hasAttributeOrAncestorHasAttribute(...)
https://gist.github.com/wgthom/f34fb9edfe3029febf5b#file-isgroupmarkedforsync-java-L15

And this is working for deleted groups in the PIT:
https://gist.github.com/wgthom/f34fb9edfe3029febf5b#file-isgroupmarkedforsync-java-L22

Would it make sense to have something like:
pitGroup.hasPITAttributeAssignOrAncestorHasPITAttributeAssign(...)

Best,

Bill

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:58 AM, William G. Thompson, Jr. <> wrote:

Thanks, Shilen.  That looks exactly like what I need.

This is still very much a work in progress, but would appreciate any
thoughts on the code or direction.

Base "Group and Membership" consumer
https://gist.github.com/wgthom/cf129f9f33fdfdad5148#file-changelogconsumerbaseimpl-java

Example "Group and Membership" consumer implementation for a target
https://gist.github.com/wgthom/54e08c7d44b802f720ce#file-printchangelogconsumer-java

Best,
Bill

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:48 AM, Shilen Patel <> wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> Take a look at PITAttributeAssignFinder.  Let me know if that doesn't give
> you what you need.
>
> Thanks!
>
> - Shilen
>
> On 2/17/16, 9:25 PM, "William G. Thompson, Jr." <> wrote:
>
>>I'm working on a ChangeLogConsumer to sync groups and membership to a
>>target (in this case Office365), but it could be used for any target.
>>
>>The current design calls for a marking attribute to be assigned to
>>groups or folders.  If the attribute is assigned to a group it is
>>marked for provisioning. If the attribute is assigned to a folder all
>>the groups within the folder and any sub folders are marked for
>>provisioning.
>>
>>As the changeLogEvents come though I can check the group or parent
>>folders for the mark. So far so good. However when a deleted group
>>changeLogEvent comes through for a directly marked group, the group is
>>already deleted so I can't query the group for attribute assignments.
>>I can get the PITGroup, but it doesn't seem to provide access to
>>PITAttribtueAssignments.
>>
>>Is this possible somehow?
>>
>>Best,
>>Bill
>