adhocracy4
adhocracy4 copied to clipboard
liqd
rename group members to editors
URL: user: expected behaviour: I like to see the name of a role and immediately understand what the role is. behaviour: group members is a bit vague, and not telling me what they are allowed to do important screensize: device & browser: Comment/Question: It only affects mB (hopefully).
Screenshot?
Hmm, not sure editor fully works. For the projects "project editor" would be fine. But what about the group members in an organisation that are allowed to create projects? Still "project editor", even though they are not allowed to change every project, but only the ones of their group? And in the user's model they are called groups by default. Maybe we just give the orga and project groups a verbose name and an helptext instead of changing everything? @CarolingerSeilchenspringer and @sabinammm what do you think?
Yes, this is something that I've stumbled across as well. You can see in the wiki entry on roles that it's confusing, and I hope that I defined them correcty. Indeed I think that changing everything is tricky b/c - and this is my initial impression - roles do change as well, so that their names cannot do all the telling permanently and comprehensively. Thus, I think that giving verbose names and helptexts are the best way to go, as these can be adjusted if need be. But I think these are really necessary to counter confusion.
@fuzzylogic2000 @sabinammm I see that groups maybe are not the best wording. They are more like restricted initiators, working on behalf of an organisation. On mB they are all "Dienstleister" for administration. We will also discuss their rights for plans again, so "project editor" wouldn't do. Question: Where would you work with verbose names and helptexts? As far as I know the namens "initiators" and "group/ group members" are not mentioned in frontend/dashboard anywhere. Only moderators, no?
@CarolingerSeilchenspringer you are right, we do not use the names in the frontend, but a lot in the backend. And it's every confusing when the naming in frontend and backend differs or the naming in the backend is just not saying what it does.
But here it is especially complicated, because the groups are in so many places. For the moderators and inititiators, it is easy, because they are just users added to the project or organisation. But for the groups to work, The user has to be added to a group and that group then needs to be added to the project or organisation or plan. So that is one thing: currently in project, organisation and plan, we just call the things where the groups need to be added "group", that is in the respective model and that is where I thought a verbose name would make sense. And then in the backend we also have a weird naming for the permissions. In the permissions we do stuff like checking if someone is an initiator or moderator and that is called is_initiator or is_moderator, but for the groups we say sth. like is_project_group_member or is_org_group_member, which is confusing because in a+ we also have organisation members, which are allowed to take part in every (also private) projects of that organisation.
So, my proposal:
for the groups (which we only see in the django-admin and the code), we call them whatever it is they are editing. So, for the projects it would be "project editor groups", for plans "plan editor groups" and for the organisations "organisation editor group".
and then for the permissions, we do the same and say is_project_editor, is_organisation_editor and so on. That might not be the perfect naming, but a big step forward and will save us from more confusion.
when starting from the project, the renaming becomes a bit crazy here: https://github.com/liqd/adhocracy4/blob/de27b93a72784d9f3bc77c4830248062f7634f9b/adhocracy4/projects/predicates.py#L7 Sooo, I think, we have to fix #725 first.
I don't think, we should rename. Too much code, to deep in everything.