I'm getting an error when uploading my customized policy, which is based on Microsoft's SocialAccounts example ([tenant] is a placeholder I added):
Policy "B2C_1A_TrustFrameworkExtensions" of tenant "[tenant].onmicrosoft.com" makes a reference to ClaimType with id "client_id" but neither the policy nor any of its base policies contain such an element
I've done some customization to the file, including adding local account signon, but comparing copies of TrustFrameworkExtensions.xml in the examples, I can't see where this element is defined. It is not defined in TrustFrameworkBase.xml, which is where I would expect it.
I figured it out, although it doesn't make sense to me. Hopefully this helps someone else running into the same issue.
The TrustFrameworkBase.xml is not the same in each scenario. When Microsoft documentation said not to modify it, I assumed that meant the "base" was always the same. The implication of this design is: If you try to mix and match between scenarios then you also need to find the supporting pieces in the TrustFrameworkBase.xml and move them into your extensions document. It also means if Microsoft does provide an update to their reference policies and you want to update, you need to remember which one you implemented originally and potentially which other ones you had to pull from or do line-by-line comparison. Not end of the world, but also not how I'd design an inheritance structure.
This also explains why I had to work through previous validation errors, including missing <DisplayName> and <Protocol> elements in the <TechnicalProfile> element.
Yes - I agree that is a problem.
My suggestion is always to use the "SocialAndLocalAccountsWithMfa" scenario as the sample.
That way you will always have the correct attributes and you know which one to use if there is an update.
It's easy enough to comment out the MFA stuff in the user journeys if you don't want it.
There is one exception. If you want to use "username" instead of "email", the reads/writes etc. are only in the username sample.
Related
I need to check and add permissions on lots of folders, I was looking into using ReportService2010, but I have doubt regarding inheritance of security settings. In all examples I found online they are using:
$inheritParent = $true
in method
.GetPolicies($reportFolder, [ref]$inheritParent)
but this is not always the case.. sometimes folders have security setting independent from parent. Is there a way to check this setting using same assembly?
I have some doubts what exactly this does, I ran the same with $false and results were the same. Still I'd like to avoid breaking something when adding new user to folder.
I checked GetProperties and GetPermissions methods, but they do not return value I was looking for.
$inheritParent has to be initialized before it can be used with .GetPolicies. As you've already discovered, it doesn't matter what value you use. You can even set it to $null if you like, which might make it less confusing. You'll want to check the value after the call is made to determine if the policies returned are inherited or not.
The code found at https://github.com/microsoft/ReportingServicesTools might be useful to you. You can use it in its entirety or just as a reference.
We have a need for "Blending of hits from different sources", as per your documentation it is recommended to write a custom-searcher in JAVA. Is there a demo of this written somewhere on Github ? I wouldn't even know where to start :( I understand I can create search "chains" , preferably Asynchronous, and then blend results in JAVA before returning them...but then how would I handle paginations, limits...etc ? This all seems very complicated, for someone who doesn't even know JAVA that much. So, I am hoping someone has already written a demo for this ? Please ? Anyone ?
Thank you so much
EDIT to make my quesion clearer:
We are writing a search engine that fetches data from various websites. Some websites have 10mil indexable items, other websites only 100,000. When we present the results to end user, we want to include results from all our sources ( when match applies ). Let's say 10 results from each of the websites we crawl, so that they all get equal amount of attention on page. If we don't do custom blending, what happens is that the largest website with most items wins all our traffic.
I understand that we can send 10 separate queries to VESPA, and blend the results in our front end, but that seems very inefficient. Thus, the quesion of "Custome Searcher". Thank you so much !
That documentation covers some very advanced use cases which you do not have. Are your sources different Vespa schemas or content clusters? If so Vespa will by default blend the hits returned from each according to their relevance scores so there's nothing you need to do.
The two other most common use-cases are:
Some (or all) the data sources are external, so you need to write a Searcher component to fetch the external data and turn it into a Result.
You want the data to be blended in some custom way (rather than by relevance score). If so you need to exclude the default blending Searcher (com.yahoo.prelude.searcher.BlendingSearcher) and write your own.
If you provide some more information about your use cases I can give you some code examples.
EDIT: Use grouping to solve the need explained under "EDIT" in the question:
Create a "siteid" field when feeding (e.g in document processing).
Use the grouping expression all(group(siteid) each(max(10) output(summary())))
See http://docs.vespa.ai/documentation/grouping.html
I'm currently working on a project, which has to be MISRA 2012 compliant. But in the embedded world, you can't fulfill every MISRA rule. So I have to suppress some messages generated by QA-C. What's he best solution to do this?
I was thinking about making a table in every module header file with references (\ref and \anchor) to the relevant code lines, a description, etc. The first problem is: I can't use the Doxygen markdown table feature, because then the description has to be in one line, because Doxygen tables don't support line breaking. So I thought about using a simple verbatim table, what do you think?
Or is there a way to generate such a table automatically?
Greetings
m0nKeY
According to MISRA, all such undesired rules must be handled by your deviation procedure, given that they are either "required" or "advisory". You are not allowed to deviate from "mandatory" rules. (Strictly speaking, you don't need to invoke the deviation procedure for advisory rules.)
In my experience, the safest and smoothest way by far to do this, is to not allow individual deviations on case-by-case basis. All deviations from MISRA should be stated in your company coding standard, and in order to deviate you have to update that document. Which in turn enforces approval from the document owner, who is preferably the most hardened C veteran you have in the team.
That way, you prevent less experienced team members from misinterpreting the rules and ignoring important rules, simply because they don't understand them and mistake them for false positives. There should be a rationale in the document stating why the rule you deviate from is not feasible for your company.
This means that everyone in the dev team is allowed to deviate from the listed rules at any point, without the need to invoke any form of bureaucracy.
Once you have a setup like this, simply customize your static analyser and remove/ignore the undesired warnings. That way, you get rid of a lot of noise and false warnings from the tool.
To answer your question generally: To create an aggregate occurrence list of anything in doxygen, use \xrefitem
We use this as a tool in our code review process. I tag code with a custom tag \reviewme which adds the function to a list of all code in need of peer review. The next guy can come along and clear that tag. We have another custom tag \reviewedby which does not use \xrefitem but simply puts the reivewers name and the date in the code block saying who reviewed it and when. This had gotten a bit clunky as things have scaled with larget code bases and more developers. Now we're looking into tools that integrate with our version control process to handle this better. But when we started this it worked well and fit a shoestring budget. But that example should give you an idea of is capable.
Here is a screen shot of what the output looks like - proprietary stuff and auto names redacted:
Here is how we added this custom tag as an alias to xrefitem in our doxy file as follows
ALIASES = "reviewme = \xrefitem reviewme \"This section needs peer review\" \"Documentation block or code sections that need peer review\""
To add it from the GUI, you would go to Expert->Project->Aliases and add a line like this
reviewme = \xrefitem reviewme "This section needs peer review" "Documentation block or code sections that need peer review"
Same thing, just no need to put quotes around the whole thing and escape out the inner quotes.
\xrefitem is the underpinning of how things like \todo or \bug work in doxygen. You can make a list of just about anything your heart desires.
Speaking specifically to MISRA exceptions: Lundin's post has lot's of merit. I would consider it. I think a better place to document exceptions to coding standards is in the static analysis tool its self. Many tools have their own annotations where you can categorize the rule violation as 'excused' or whatever. But generally this does not remove them from the list, it allows you just to filter or sort them. Perhaps you can use REGEX in a script that runs prior to doxygen that will replace the tool specific annotation with a custom \xrefitem if you are really concerned. Or vice vera, replace the doxy annotation with your tool's annotation.
I'm hoping somebody can help me.
I have added nine term reference fields, one for each of my vocabularies, to the Create New User page. What I want is to only allow one term to be selected from all nine term reference fields.
I realise that one way of doing this would be to combine the nine vocabularies into one and then choose to only allow the selection of one term. However, I would much prefer to keep my vocabularies separate.
I had a look at the Rules module but couldn't see an Action to fail the validation of a new user, even if I could test for empty fields etc.
I also had a look at the Conditional Fields module but again couldn't see a way to fail the validation.
Any help or pointers would be most gratefully received.
Many thanks,
Matt
I have managed to achieve what I wanted after discovering the excellent Rules Forms Support module. I ran into a bit of difficulty because there is no condition to check whether a form element is empty, only to compare it to a value. To overcome this I included the term 'None' to each vocabulary, set it as the default value and chose the field to be required. I was then able to set the condition to compare against this (tid) and it worked!
Hopefully this may be of help to someone someday.
Happy Drupaling to you,
Matt
I was wondering if someone could point me in the right direction.
Here is my problem: I have a large form/checklist that I would like to make digital for ease of use.
Thoughts: I would like to use existing tools that would be easy to integrate. My first option is Access 2010.
My question: I would like to enter the questions into a database and then use those entries to auto generate a form that can be used to allow the user to input the actual data into the database. An example would be I have 11 Sections of questions and under each section I have sub-sections that can contain anywhere from 1-... how many every questions we need.
Is it possible to use data stored in an Access database to generate a form with Checkboxes that can be used to input data?
Please point me in the right direction. Obviously there is the option of just creating multiple forms or one big form, but I would like this form to easily be changed etc... Less work more automation.
Thanks,
Alex
Depending on the requirements of your project, this may be quite possible. If you want to use Access as both the back-end and front-end, then you'll need to work within a few limitations:
Because Access combines the user interface and design interface into the same screen, it requires a certain amount of trust that the user can't or won't try to get too creative with changing the data, seeing everyone else's data, changing the design of your form because they are bored, etc. There are ways around these problems, but they can get complicated.
Will all your users be using Window's machines with Access 2010 installed and with the original default settings? If so, good. If not, there may be ways that this could still work.
(There's more, but that's all I can think of right now)
To get started, here's a broad outline:
Make a table for your questions. This table would just have the questions.
Make a form using that question table as the source. Leave the checkboxes and other answer fields unbounded. Include a 'submit' button at the bottom.
The submit button will create a sql query to insert the user's answers into a 2nd table.
If you have any specific questions, we here at SO will be glad to answer them.
In order to dynamically and easily change the number of questions in the sections, what I would do is:
In the main Questions table, add a field called Section to allocate the questions into diffferent ones, and another one Yes/No field to select those that are included (you may also exclude them by leaving the section field empty, as you wish). This will solve the problem of changing the design easily. you probaly will need an admin form in order to do this changes, to avoid touching the tables directly, but this is your decision.
Secondly, in order to allow the users to efectively answer the generated form, you have to ask yourself if you want to accumulate the answer sets, and if you are going to control who answers