You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 2, 2018. It is now read-only.
This is related to #54 (in which we propose different kinds of groups, which means different kinds of permissions) and #49 (tagging/sectioning improvements) -- and is for the most part implied by those two as a special case.
However, since the intersection of these features -- collaborations -- is very important to get this right (and a very visible gap if we don't!), I'm making note of it here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Note that permissions for collaborations need to be double checked, so that private ones don't show up in any listings except ones available to individual co-authors.
... Update: I now have it sorted out so that private articles are listed separately from public ones, and only appear for their owner.
But are coauthors for collabs being ported in at all?
Keep in mind, co-authored articles, both public and private, should show up on user homepages. ATM we're showing "my private articles", "my public articles", and "my coauthored (public) articles". Adding links for coauthored private articles wouldn't be hard. (But see comment above, we need to import the relevant co-author groups.)
I've decided NOT to import the co-author groups for now, maybe that's silly, but I don't want to personally be responsible for opening the privacy loophole wider... and there aren't that many other collab objects. The main thing is that the collabs are there. I'll close this issue & we can sort out the listing/presentation stuff when I know what people want.
This is related to #54 (in which we propose different kinds of groups, which means different kinds of permissions) and #49 (tagging/sectioning improvements) -- and is for the most part implied by those two as a special case.
However, since the intersection of these features -- collaborations -- is very important to get this right (and a very visible gap if we don't!), I'm making note of it here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: