Resource Calendar ACL, different scopes

[Cliff Wakefield]

Hi,

Firstly let me say that I really appreciate the inclusion of Calendar ACL functionality in GAM 2.2+.

At our organisation we would like to modify ACL's for resource calendars at the domain level rather than at the user level, ie: scope = domain rather than scope = user

We would like to be able to specify the ACL for our resource calendars to be "reader" as our actual domain default sharing option is "freebusyreader" for policy reasons.

http://code.google.com/apis/calendar/v3/reference.html#resource_acl

Is there any chance this functionality is going to be added to GAM?

Any timeframe for it's inclusion?

I am not sure how much effort it would be to extend the user level ACL code to domain level ACL's.

I did take a look at the source code of GAM but it's a bit beyond me at present to attempt to do modifications.

[Jay Lee]

Hi Cliff,

  It's not documented yet but GAM 2.3 can already modify the sharing settings for both domain (anyone in your Google Apps) and default (any on the Internet). The commands would look like:

gam calendar <calendar email> update read domain

gam calendar <calendar email> update freebusy default

note that there's a bug with GAM 2.3 that prevents these entries from being deleted properly so should be able to turn these on but GAM 2.3 can't turn them off. The next GAM release will fix this.

Interesting side note: While the GCal UI only allows you to give all domain users freebusy and read access to a calendar, the API will let you give all domain users editor and owner rights so:

gam calendar <calendar email> update editor domain

would give all domain users rights to modify the calendar and:

gam calendar <calendar email> update owner domain

would give all domain users ownership of the calendar. Owner would be a bit chaotic though as any user in the domain would then be able to modify the calendar ACLs themselves.

Jay

[Cliff Wakefield]

Hi Jay,

You sir are amazing ;)

That does exactly what I need and just in the nick of time for our project...

I have successfully tested this in one of our environments and I'm please to report it works as not advertised ;)