Navigate through the tree of knowledge, add new questions or answers, and rate those that have already been asked/answered.
<Oveur> Yes, absolutely, it's just that access control management isn't always that straightforward, not to mention if you want it integrated into thecurrent corp roles, which we really do have lots of already
<Oveur> so, we just have to get around to designing and implementing it but it hasn't gotten a timeslot yet in our development
<Oveur> but it's quite high on the list of desired POS features, so when we get dev time for new POS features, it's in
<Oveur> so, we just have to get around to designing and implementing it but it hasn't gotten a timeslot yet in our development
<Oveur> but it's quite high on the list of desired POS features, so when we get dev time for new POS features, it's in
No Dev Time yet associated with changing Roles and features for POS access rights ??? you have to be kidding me.... and of course you want people to lay out more POS and move to 0.0... but won't insure there is a simple role that allows access to a POS's features and arrays without access to the OFF switch...
Dude, the POS was a major part of exodus. I really love CCP and respect each and every one of you (as far as I've followed your blogs over the months) but the POS situation is just plain wrong. Man, it takes a willingness to sacrifice your left nut to make one work well (or extremely good placement and connections), but the access issues and the million other bugs clearly indicates this should never have left the hanger. With all due respect.
Caztra Tor
Caztra Tor