+1 to drop it. Never understood why it was a problem anyway On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 5:43 PM Simon Urli <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I'm coming back on this proposal as the work is going on, to basically > propose to dropping the warning on copy action. > > I try to sum up why in the following. > > When implementing the proposal, I was adviced to use an event listener, > observing the deleting event for informing the user if he were doing a > refactoring on a document containing an XClass. > This work is already implemented and working for Moving/Renaming pages > (which involve deleting the old page) and of course deleting. > > Now going back on "Copy" the page, it's another job as I cannot rely on > a "Deleting" event. I checked quickly and I don't think I really could > rely on other events for this: basically copying is about creating a > document and updating its content, and I don't think we want to rely on > those event for this mechanism. > > So unless you have another proposal to handle this case, I propose to > simply drop it. > > Do you agree? > > Simon > > > On 9/26/18 10:27 AM, Simon Urli wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > ok trying to sum-up (I'm only talking about cases with XClass below, to > > simplify): > > - according to Vincent, we should completely prevent simple users to > > copy/move/rename and only allow advanced users to do it after a warning > > - according to Adel & Clément: preventing simple users will be > > useless as they can easily switch the advanced feature in their account > > - according to Marius copying a page/app is not necessarily harmful > > compared to moving/renaming and we should manage it differently. > > > > I really don't know the practice of users on the field, but it looks to > > me that preventing simple users to do the action and telling them to ask > > an advanced user is actually a good trade-off: > > > > 1. it will warn users that they might be doing something wrong > > 2. it's not something completely blocking: either they ask for the > > admin/advanced user, or they know they can switch the advanced features > > by themselves, at their own risks > > > > Now maybe we can only do the warning for the "copy" action. > > > > WDYT? > > > > Simon > > > > > > On 9/25/18 11:36 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: > >> Hi Marius, > >> > >>> On 25 Sep 2018, at 11:34, Marius Dumitru Florea > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 11:12 AM Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Simon, > >>>> > >>>>> On 21 Sep 2018, at 16:58, Simon Urli <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 9/21/18 4:53 PM, Adel Atallah wrote: > >>>>>> +1 for the warning, but I would not forbid simple users from renaming > >>>>>> or moving pages but instead just hide the action (from the page > >>>>>> menu). > >>>>> > >>>>> OK I should have written it: by "forbid" I meant: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. Hide the action from the menu > >>>>> 2. Return an error message if the user try to access the > >>>> renaming/moving page (using forged URL) > >>>>> > >>>>> So you suggest we shouldn't do 2? > >>>> > >>>> So +1 to prevent/warn the user when doing a move/renaming > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> AND copy pages containing XClass definitions > >>> > >>> > >>> FTR, copying a single page having an XClass definition is not > >>> dangerous (it > >>> won't break the application that owns the page), as it only creates a > >>> new > >>> class definition. Copying an entire application is not dangerous either. > >>> The copy won't work like the original application (this justifies a > >>> warning > >>> as it may fail the user expectations), but the original application will > >>> still work. Renaming or moving an application is dangerous as it > >>> breaks the > >>> application. > >> > >> Yes you’re correct. Unless the user does a copy + delete ;) > >> > >> Thanks > >> -Vincent > >> > >>> > >>>> (the message should list all such pages). > >>>> > >>>> -1 to hide the action from the menu (if you’re talking about the > >>>> “Move/Rename” and “Copy" actions) because: > >>>> 1) you get to choose whether you move/rename/copy children after you > >>>> click > >>>> the action > >>>> 2) even when the current page has an XClass, the user wouldn't > >>>> understand > >>>> why he cannot see/click on the action. It’s better that he can do it > >>>> but > >>>> get an error message, explaining why and telling him that to contact an > >>>> advanced users if he really needs to do it. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks > >>>> -Vincent > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 4:44 PM Simon Urli <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> users might currently break their AWM application by renaming/moving > >>>>>>> pages containing XClass definition. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We need a proper refactoring operation to be able to properly do > >>>>>>> such > >>>>>>> move/rename. But this feature might take a while to be completely > >>>>>>> available. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In the meantime I propose that we prevent users from renaming/moving > >>>>>>> pages containing XClass. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> What I propose is the following: > >>>>>>> - Forbid completely *simple users* to rename/move pages containing > >>>> XClass > >>>>>>> - Display a warning to *advanced users* when they perform such > >>>>>>> operation: the same kind of warning we already have when performing > >>>> edit > >>>>>>> on XWiki pages > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> WDYT? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Simon > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Simon Urli > >>>>>>> Software Engineer at XWiki SAS > >>>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>> More about us at http://www.xwiki.com > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Simon Urli > >>>>> Software Engineer at XWiki SAS > >>>>> [email protected] > >>>>> More about us at http://www.xwiki.com > >> > > > > -- > Simon Urli > Software Engineer at XWiki SAS > [email protected] > More about us at http://www.xwiki.com
-- Thomas Mortagne
