Team and users as blueprints
complete
Gur Shafriri
complete
Done! Users and Teams as blueprint is now the default for new organizations, and available for migration to existing organizations 🎉
Extend the users and teams with custom properties and relations and make sense of the relationship between your people and your software catalog. Use "Owning Team" property to define ownership and use it with dynamic RBAC.
Learn more in the docs
We thank all the users who activated the beta version!
Note that all organizations that were created before January 14th, 2024, require a migration to the new users and teams. Learn about the migration process and how to start it in the migration guide. As this introduces some potential breaking changes, there is a three-month migration period before applying the changes to all organizations during May 2024.
R
Rory Logue
What is left on this feature for it to be considered complete? It is frustrating having both owning teams and the teams blueprint right now.
Gur Shafriri
Rory Logue Most of what is missing is around ownership settings 👍🏽
Can you elaborate more on your specific frustration?
R
Rory Logue
Gur Shafriri If I have a relation of team to another blueprint e.g. service, that blueprint contains teams and owning teams as a 'property'.
I don't want to use owning teams anymore, and the team blueprint would be much more powerful as a meta property.
Gur Shafriri
Rory Logue Thanks for sharing!
So our current plan is to keep owning team as a property, but it will not be added by default to blueprints anymore.
This will keep the option to define "owning teams" either as a direct relation to the team blueprint (without creating another relation) or via team inheritance, as well as not defining owning teams at all and just create a relation to team that doesn't have to do anything with ownership.
How does that sound to you?
R
Rory Logue
Gur Shafriri That sounds good - when is that due to be released please? or is that screenshot deployed already?
Gur Shafriri
Rory Logue No, this screen shot is from our plan design.
It is due this Q, I will update here when I have more info.
R
Rory Logue
Gur ShafririAny update on this feature please?
Gur Shafriri
Rory Logue Still in the oven :)
What we already know is that this will unfortunately require a migration for existing organizations. We will publish a deprecation notice for the current when this is up, next to a guide on how to migrate.
Gur Shafriri
in progress
Amir Gal Or
Hi, we've sort of implemented this ourselves to some extent.
we have users on multiple 3rd party services (Sentry, Github and a few more).
we've created a "User" entity (also Team) and a BE process that ingest data from aforementioned services into Port. the User entity is a flattening of the data - the user id in each system correlated to his email and User in Port.
Github does present a small problem as the service does not promise the existence of an email in the response - that can be mitigated by asking all developers/users to add their email to the Github user in a public manner and querying Github with the query attached below to the "graphql" endpoint
Dudi - Port team
open
C
Chase Steenbock
This would be great. Bitbucket doesn't provide users' email addresses via its API, so allowing us to add their UUID or Atlassian account ID would be great