Alec Mitchell wrote:
Owner was there in Plone < 3.0. IIRC, it was removed because the name
is confusing, particularly since it is redundant with the object
ownership. Granting the Manager role means giving local ZMI rights
and even the ability to e.g. add a local acl_users and create a little
fiefdom, which may not be wise to allow through the sharing tab. In
any case only Managers would be able to grant Manager, whereas Owner
could be granted more easily. However, I'd suggest we add it back
only if we can find a suitable synonym for it. Being able to say
"grant this person the same rights that I (the creator of this
content) have" is a very useful thing, even if the default
nomenclature is confusing. Alternatively, we could adjust the
workflows to make e.g. 'Contributor' more powerful.
We can certainly add these roles back, though again I think it's outside
the scope of the PLIP (which merely makes it easier for people to add
them themselves using GenericSetup).
I'm -1 on adding Owner: I think it causes a lot of confusion. That said,
we could maybe have it managed in another way, whereby you get a
different form for "change ownership" that lets you assign multiple
owners (maybe with one designed as "primary"). This would set the
Contributors metadata and assign the Owner role to multiple people.
I'm +0 on adding Manager. It's certainly useful in a lot of situations.
In theory, yes, they could go add a bunch of stuff to the ZMI, but for
most sites that's not an issue, and sometimes you *do* want to delegate
the role.
Martin
--
Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
___
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
