Community mailing list archives
Re: Benevolent Record Dictatorby
You sure about hide buttons ?
In 8.0 works perfect.
That was the latest conclusion, I have drawn. (I think on 9)
Thank's for the poke, I will double check again on this more thoroughly.
El mar., 20 oct. 2015 a las 13:37, Ovnicraft (<email@example.com>) escribió:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:12 PM, David Arnold <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:Andre, thanks for your reply.If I'm not wrong, remove permissions is possible. An easy pattern could even be to base the permissions filter on the create_uid column of the system user (create_uid = 1).But, here is the point. If you have read access, it does not hide the "edit button", so there is awkward behavior:- You try to edit a record, make changes, invest one hour and at saving time, there is an error, that you don't have permissions. This is not very cool.You sure about hide buttons ?In 8.0 works perfect.
Probably the edit button can be made invisible elegantly on such cases with an additional rule? this would be a nice workaround, although hacky, because, I suppose, that the rule is true: no edit rights = no edit button.Someone must have had this problem in the past???!!!???Best, DavidEl mar., 20 oct. 2015 a las 5:58, André P. (<email@example.com>) escribió:What do you have in mind regarding the look & feel? I mean, loading records from data files and removing write/create/unlink permissions is already possible (not at field-level, unfortunately, but that can be workaround with a custom module if needed).2015-10-19 21:12 GMT+01:00 David Arnold <firstname.lastname@example.org>:HiI want to ask you, dear community member, if you know of someone, who has been able to govern "system" records centrally.What I want to do is:- Create records from data files- Protect those records, so that they are not editable (ideally fine-grained on fields)- Manage those records completely from a central managing instance.The problem with the existing mechanism is that it does not alter the look and feel of the frontend. It just blocks the records for access with an ugly access message.Anyone got an idea?Many thanks, David