Add restriction to permissions

[hikalkan]

Add FeatureName and GlobalFeatureName properties to PermissionDefinition.

• Check feature name from IFeatureChecker. If it returns false, PermissionChecker should return false when we check IsGranted for this permission. Also, PermissionAppService.GetAsync should not return this permission in the returning list.
• Check the global feature name from GlobalFeatureManager. If it returns false, PermissionChecker should return false when we check IsGranted for this permission. Also, PermissionAppService.GetAsync should not return this permission in the returning list.

You should also care this on PermissionManager.

Hint: Find usages of PermissionDefinition.IsEnabled. You typically mostly changes is same places for checking.

[maliming]

What if I want to add other checks in the future? Add more properties to the PermissionDefinition?

We can abstract it, and developers can customize a service to deciding whether this permission is enabled.

Feature-management provides a check service, and GlobalFeatures also provides it.

Use case:
Users with the manager role can only manage some permissions but not all. I can disable some permissions based on the current user role.

[NecatiMeral]

The use case @maliming is describing is kinda equal to #8309.

[hikalkan]

@maliming PermissionDefinition has a Properties dictionary as an extension point. Instead of adding string RequiredFeature property to the PermissionDefinition, we can create an extension point like PermissionDefinition.RequireFeature(string featureName) which internally adds the feature name to the Properties dictionary.

Then you can define an interface, like IPermissionFilterProvider* that has a bool FilterAsync(PermissionDefinition permission) method. We can then implement RequireFeaturePermissionFilterProvider that gets the feature name from the Properties dictionary and returns false if current tenant has no feature.
We accept multiple IPermissionFilterProvider implementations, like other contribution systems.

What about such a design?

*name should be thought again :)

[maliming]

I will give it a try.

[muratyuceer]

@hikalkan also if you add CanManageFeature property to User/Roles (for decide which users/roles can modify which feature permissions) in this way i guess there may be a solution about that problem #8309
Or maybe you may have a different approach

--Update--
Or maybe you can add admin/manager property to Feature object (feature based admin)
Now admin is like god mood we need to separate that