-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 217
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Issue comparing assignments #274
Comments
Hello, I'm still working on it. I've been crazy busy lately so I haven't had as much time I would like for it. Are these comparing between two environments? Guid normally means that the group is deleted or group info is not available for exported policy. Cheers! |
Hi Micke-K, Thanks for your quick reply. It's indeed a compare of policies from different tenants. The groups are still there and assigned. I noticed when I document a policy, the group assignements are also not exported to the CSV, see the image below. However when I look at the raw output, the name of the assigned group is shown, see the image below. Maybe it's related to the issue in the compare function. Thanks and keep up the good work! |
Hello, I just released 3.9.8. This should fix both the Group name on exported policies during compare and group name in CSV output. Not that the Assignments will have multiple lines if they don't match. This is by design. If the group names are the same, it will be a single line. Cheers! |
Hi Micke-K, Fantastic! Thanks a lot for fixing this on such a short notice. Cheers! |
Closing issue. Included in 3.9.8 |
Hi Micke-K,
Hope all is well and you still find the time and motivation to continue to improve this great tool!
When trying to compare two policies, we find the assignments (assigned group) are not compared properly. Instead of showing a single row, the assigned groups are shown on 2 different rows and instead of the name of the group the object id is shown, see the attached screen shot. Can you please look into this and let us know if this can be fixed. Thanks in advance!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: