Complex use of private synonyms

Question

I need to write a create user script that sets up our database. for production this is easy, but for development and test it gest complicated.
We have 1 user that contains all of our data tables.
another user that has all our code and our logging data.
In development I need to create sets so developers can have their own environment.
So how do I make code_user_a only see code_user_b's data without changing code? I think can do this with private synonyms, but I am not sure how to do it.

Answer 1

First off. Synonyms have not changed over the last few version, but we are in 10.2
Second off the point of the question is that I do not want to put them each in their own schema, I want it to mirror production. This is where the complexity comes from. I also don't want to change code.
In production we will have two schemas
Schema 1: All the tables that contain application data that users will see
Schema 2: All the code and the logging tables
This is a fairly standard deploy and not that uncommon. However, it gets complicated in development because I can have multiple "sets" of
Schema 1
Schema 2
For example, a Developer named Jim and a Developer named Bob need to have their own set of schemas to do testing. So I need
Schema1_Jim
Schema2_Jim
Schema1_Bob
Schema2_Bob
I only want Bob's Schema2(which has code that uses data in schema 1) to see schema1_Bob and not Schema1_Jim.
It is not uncommon to deploy with multiple schemas for security reasons. I have seen it required by SOX auditors because the group that deploys the code is different than the group that deploys the data and the auditors say they are not allowed to share passwords.
This is my requirement and I have to deal with it. The question is what is the best way to handle it in development. Productoin is easy becuase there is only one set of privileges.
DBMS_WM is a good suggestion for a simple system. However, we have code that adds and drops partitions that need to act on the other schema so it won't work/.