Thank you for reminding us the differences between the hosting options.
My questions are based on a specific use case.
As a university Campus, we will provide seafile hosting to different institutions, which could lead us to use Multi-institution feature
- for users originating from different universities
- but who need to share files between them and also create groups independant from the institutions.
We will not use shibboleth affiliation, because we already build a LDAP directory in which all users are separated between OU = institutions (organizationalUnit) and Groups = Laboratories (groupOfNames).
Laboratories do not depend from institutions, their members can belong to different instiitutions.
We already (since 2 years) have a Seafile instance for our institution, which must be separated from the others.
Instead of installing a new seafile instance, i’m thinking of one Multitenancy instance in which two tenant (the former and the new one) could share the program files, but with a logical split between the two.
In this case, we could have two LDAP for each one tenant.
As it seems to be difficult to implement, i suppose that installing two instances of seafile is the best way to achieve our goals.
- The former one with classic config and LDAP Syncing :
- We already have former “groups” for departments and i’m afraid it will be difficult to migrate these to departments.
- Instead the nesting feature, i don’t really see the differnce between the two options.
- The new one, which could be a multi-intitutions instance, but we may need to
- sync departments from LDAP in each institution
- create groups between institutions
Which i think is quite complicated…