Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

grouper-users - Re: [grouper-users] replication to Google, Phase 2 ....

Subject: Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

List archive

Re: [grouper-users] replication to Google, Phase 2 ....

Chronological Thread 
  • From: David Langenberg <>
  • To: Steven Carmody <>
  • Cc: Grouper-Users <>
  • Subject: Re: [grouper-users] replication to Google, Phase 2 ....
  • Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 09:33:46 -0600

Our grouper is a bit old for that (1.6) but we do use Group Types and let group admins set various types (and attributes on those types) to control how and where a group is provisioned.  We keep things simple with that though and typically we give 10-15 minutes of training to new departmental group admins on what the various types are and what the inputs to the attributes should be.

Generally when we have a use-case for delegating grouper stuff to non-IT people and it involves more than just adding a member to a group, we write a custom web UI for that use-case.


On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Steven Carmody <> wrote:
Sent from my iPad

On Aug 7, 2014, at 3:34 PM, David Langenberg <> wrote:

Why not use attributes to indicate to the provisioner how the group should be provisioned to GAE?  Have a sane set of globals and let the group admins override where it makes sense?

I'm wondering whether anyone has tried this approach ? There are *so many* potential properties in GAE that I'm wondering whether "regular users" would be confused or overwhelmed trying to manage Grouper attributes. Particularly because we don't normally expect them to understand and manage Grouper attributes.

Does anyone have any experience delegating the authority to manage Grouper Attributes to people in Depts ? (ie to administrative people in academic depts, to non-IT people ? )



On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Steven Carmody <> wrote:

Like a growing number of schools, we have implemented a mechanism to replicate group memberships from Grouper to GAE. The initial implementation was very basic, and will create a group in GAE, and then manage the membership on an ongoing basis.

Initially, we were doing this with Course groups, and a small number of department-oriented groups. However, we're in the process of delegating to departments the ability and authority to create and mange groups to meet their local needs. We're discovering that people use groups for different purposes (duh ! ), and that in some cases they would like the properties of the target google group to be set differently from the defaults. This isn't really a surprise, and we expect to see the same sort of requests when we start replicating to AD in the next few weeks.

We're interested in starting a conversation about how to address these requirements. We're wondering whether other campuses have started to develop ways to address these sorts of requirements.

Looking forward to an interesting conversation !

David Langenberg
Identity & Access Management
The University of Chicago

David Langenberg
Identity & Access Management
The University of Chicago

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page