Vikash Singh

@Chief-Rishab I think adding no policies or no approvers associated with these appeals would not be ideal. There should be an admin page and the admin/approver could revoke this access...

https://github.com/odpf/guardian/pull/162/commits/5d01b7c9ae0ef8ddc64a5745f81a208b0b4be9cf @rahmatrhd added `_guardian_` as a prefix to groups created by Guardian, also check on `_guardian_` while adding group as resources into Guardian.

@rahmatrhd @ravisuhag currently guardian doesn't allow the creation of appeal for another user and this is checked [here](https://github.com/odpf/guardian/blob/main/core/appeal/service.go#L939). IMO, this should be part of policy where an org can define...

@ravisuhag yes, As an admin they should be able to add this check as part of the approval flow instead of its default check-in guardian appeal service. ``` id: sample_policy...

@rahmatrhd IMO, user details in the creator field should be based on the `created_by` field. Creator owns the lifecycle of this appeal. We only need to notify another user about...

@rahmatrhd @ravisuhag This one is finalized then, we can start the dev on this. The approach is: - Create a config in policy to enable/disable cross-user appeal creation. - If...

@mabdh we have configured an additional policy for data access with role data-retrieval in case, someone raises an access request to a dataset with a role viewer. However, the additional...

@mabdh even we can think something of like a skip or removing the dependency on additional appeal. This will be useful if an additional appeal has a manual approver and...

@Chief-Rishab I liked the above idea of bulk appeal approval for a group from outside of the guardian. Even the lifecycle of members(member add to a group, member remove to...

@bsushmith how we can change the type of this issue.