[2.0 beta2] Multiple Issues with Direct Messages

[GreXXL]

Current Behavior

If there is no permission for a group to send messages the button is greyed out but the text is not like with posts. It still says "Send a Message" while it should "Can't send a Message" (like it is for discussions and posts)

If you don't have permissions to start direct messages you can still access it via the menu (which is fine as you can be written to). Weirdly the notification icon for direct messages is hidden though. Even more weirdly you can see a reply box on a message but only after sending you receive an error "You do not have permission to do that".
=> Either the single permission remains then messages should generally be hidden (which is weired because other users don't know that users of that group can't be messaged?) It would mean that noone should be able to message users of that group (even admins?)
=> Permissions are split like with discussions in create and reply?

Another thing that I have noticed is that messages don't have any anchorpoints. You can't click the date / time as usally to get a link with an anchor. This means that you are always at the top of the message. The longer the conversation the more confusing. This is also the case when you for example go to a users profile and send a message you are then redirected to the top of a already long conversation.

The text when there is no message notification is confusing - it says "You have no messages yet. When you send or receive messages, they will appear here." while it should say "No new messages" (like it's with notifications).

Steps to Reproduce

Multiple

Expected Behavior

See above

Screenshots

No response

Environment

Flarum core: 2.0.0-beta.2
PHP version: 8.2.27
MySQL version: 10.3.39-MariaDB-0ubuntu0.20.04.2
Loaded extensions: Core, date, libxml, openssl, pcre, zlib, bz2, calendar, ctype, hash, filter, ftp, gettext, gmp, json, iconv, SPL, pcntl, random, readline, Reflection, session, standard, mbstring, SimpleXML, sockets, tokenizer, xml, mysqlnd, bcmath, curl, dba, dom, enchant, fileinfo, gd, imagick, imap, intl, ldap, exif, mysqli, odbc, PDO, pdo_mysql, PDO_ODBC, pdo_pgsql, pdo_sqlite, pgsql, Phar, posix, pspell, redis, soap, sodium, sqlite3, sysvmsg, sysvsem, sysvshm, tidy, xmlreader, xmlwriter, xsl, zip, Zend OPcache
+------------------------+---------------+--------+
| Flarum Extensions | | |
+------------------------+---------------+--------+
| ID | Version | Commit |
+------------------------+---------------+--------+
| flarum-flags | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-approval | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-tags | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-suspend | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-subscriptions | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-sticky | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-statistics | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-package-manager | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-nicknames | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-messages | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-mentions | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-markdown | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-lock | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-likes | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-lang-english | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-gdpr | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-emoji | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
| flarum-bbcode | v2.0.0-beta.2 | |
+------------------------+---------------+--------+

Output of php flarum info

Output of "php flarum info", run this in terminal in your Flarum directory.

Possible Solution

No response

Additional Context

No response

[SychO9]

=> Either the single permission remains then messages should generally be hidden (which is weired because other users don't know that users of that group can't be messaged?) It would mean that noone should be able to message users of that group (even admins?)

@GreXXL I think a label that communicates that the user they are messaging cannot reply is best here, the messaging could still be used in a way to send info without expecting answers (moderation or automated processes).

=> Permissions are split like with discussions in create and reply?

@GreXXL Year I wasn't entirely sure if one permission was enough, the thing is that i can see people wanting to have users hwo can only reply and not create. So I split it up. But create and not reply doesn't really make sense.

We could restrict the permissions in a way that if a user can create, then they can automatically reply.

• If you can create then it should

Another thing that I have noticed is that messages don't have any anchorpoints. You can't click the date / time as usally to get a link with an anchor. This means that you are always at the top of the message. The longer the conversation the more confusing. This is also the case when you for example go to a users profile and send a message you are then redirected to the top of a already long conversation.

It redirects to the last message (is that not the case for you?) and then you can scroll up, as we were going for a basic version of this, there is no anchor link included right now, but can definitely be added in the future.

[GreXXL]

@GreXXL I think a label that communicates that the user they are messaging cannot reply is best here, the messaging could still be used in a way to send info without expecting answers (moderation or automated processes).

Yes that sounds like a reasonable solution.

@GreXXL Year I wasn't entirely sure if one permission was enough, the thing is that i can see people wanting to have users hwo can only reply and not create. So I split it up. But create and not reply doesn't really make sense.

I think splitting up the permission would make sense, especially if above (label that person cannot reply) is implemented.

It redirects to the last message (is that not the case for you?) and then you can scroll up, as we were going for a basic version of this, there is no anchor link included right now, but can definitely be added in the future.

I thought it wasn't but it worked just fine when I retested it now. I still think anchor links would be nice to have - would be useful for other extensions to hook into this.

[SychO9]

So I split it up. But create and not reply doesn't really make sense.

correcting myself, I just started working on this and noticed that I didn't split it up, I probably did in an earlier iteration then went back to a single permission because it got confusing. (I thought it was 2 when i wrote that comment sorry).

For now i'll add the label that the other use cannot message back and leave permissions to 1 for now.