-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 96
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
Documents in a folder should be shared with its group by default #1407
Comments
Hi ! I made a pull request here : #1548 It works but I broke the unit tests of the module "oae-content" ... Can you review the changes before I repair the unit test. |
I'm on this. Which tests are failing exactly? And have you ran the whole suite? |
Hmm ... almost all (in oae-content) :
I didn't ran the other tests |
Uhh.. that's goint to take some work then. But before that, I think we need to redesign the solution to this. The current behaviour is content being shared with the group as read-only, correct? All the group members can see the document, but just as a "viewer", not as an editor. The problem lies on the fact that they are never made editors even if they have "manage" access on the folder. So, with that in mind, here's what we need to to:
Then when the user clicks "Update", the following modal box should display a slightly different message such as
Does this make sense to you @ClaireLozano ? Tell me your thoughts. |
Okay, I have some questions :
That's weird because yes they can view the document but the document isn't shared with them, that's what we call indirect roles (?) |
The feature is ready to be reviewed. So ...
It seems correct to you ? |
Hello, Sorry I took so long to reply. I think I may have not expressed myself very well but in the end I think you got it :) The new setting isn't about visibility, it's about permissions, so I think that maybe we could do something slightly different on the frontend, to make it simple. That would be to include on the ☝️ this assumes So the "default" would be as you said, but the user would still have the ability to create a "private" document like before if he/she removes those users before creating it. What do you think? Other than this visual change, I agree with your statements above 👍 |
Oooh ok I get it ! And yes I think it's the best thing to do :) |
Done ;) The feature is ready to be reviewed ! |
Will do, on Monday! |
Hi Claire, I've just tested the feature and the "Inherit folder visibility" is still there, apparently. I don't think it fits anymore, given the solution we designed for this issue. Apart from that, I don't think this is working as expected. Let me give you an example:
☝️ this is not expected beaviour. If we're displaying the users the parent folder is currently shared with, then we must adapt the permissions on the document we're creating accordingly. Right now, the user is getting "can edit" by default no matter what the user picks in the "shared with" field. Do you confirm this behaviour? |
I'm cancelling this issue. I'll provide a short explanation below: This issue makes sense. Currently, if user A creates a folder, shares it with user B (as manager) and then creates a document inside it, user B will hold the This approach is implemented on PR #2096 (the first approach from Claire one was frontend only: oaeproject/3akai-ux#4235) but I never got to fix tests, because I have since come to the conclusion this issue is superseded, since folders are going to be converted into labels (tags) on the next major version (and redesign) of OAE. If you check the wiki page for details on files vs folders. |
From uservoice:
Testing
Note: The
Inherit folder invitations?represents the fact that I have decided not to inherit invitations (made on the folder) to the content created / uploaded on that folder. The permissions are inherited (editor, viewer, manager) but the invitations are not.Inherit folder invitations?Inherit folder invitations?Inherit folder invitations?Inherit folder invitations?Inherit folder invitations?Inherit folder invitations?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: