Fix incorrect federated mapping example
The documentation didn't provide correct example of a mapping rules with direct group mapping (with blacklist/whitelist keyword). This could led users to a major confusion. The example is now fixed. Additionaly, for clarity and increased readibility the ``user`` and ``groups`` objects were split into separate ``local`` rules. Change-Id: Iff343f1ff2829ef282a1314fd07203a435611e70 Closes-Bug: #1507944
This commit is contained in:
parent
45a76d27a9
commit
dd3ef9ddd2
@ -206,12 +206,12 @@ In ``<other_condition>`` shown below, please supply one of the following:
|
||||
{
|
||||
"user": {
|
||||
"name": "{0}"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"groups": {
|
||||
"name": "{1}",
|
||||
"domain": {
|
||||
"id": "0cd5e9"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"groups": "{1}",
|
||||
"domain": {
|
||||
"id": "0cd5e9"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user