RBAC with owner

[4000D]

🎉 Description

• 🐛 This is a bug report.
• 📈 This is a feature request.

📝 Details

Ownable controls ownership of contract. I think RBACWithOwner is suitable to control access controll with permission than RBACWithAdmin. RBACWithAdmin has several problems.

1. It can't be integrated with Ownable becuase both control permissions. If we have a contract T is RBACWithAdmin, Ownable and a single admin added, and want to chagne owner, 3 transaction are required

contract.transferOwnership(newOwner, {from: owner});
contract.adminAddRole(newOwner, 'admin', {from: owner});
contract.adminRemoveRole(owner, 'admin', {from: owner});

2. RBACWithAdmin may have no admin at all if admin send trancation

contract.adminRemoveRole(admin, 'admin', {from: admin});

I suggest to integrate Ownable with RBACWithAdmin to handle owner and ROLE_ADMIN at the same time, making sure that owner has all permission to control ROLE_ADMIN

[shrugs]

Thanks for the issue!

RBACWithAdmin will be moved to the examples folder; it's just too powerful 😂 see: #936 (comment)

RBACOwnable will be introduced as part of #950 , but without a focus on backwards compatibility with Ownable.sol. We previously tested a backwards-compatible version of RBACOwnable.sol but decided that it wasn't a good enough solution.

[frangio]

Closing as we've removed the previous RBAC and our focus is on Roles now.