-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ACL for specific (lexicon) namespaces #47
Comments
Basically everybody doing a multilanguage websites is in need of that! I proposed this feature aged ago. ay Yesterday I chatted with @theboxer on that topic and he told me that he wanted to extend the groups permissions. This way it would be just filtering and display only the granted lexicons in the manager. I would love to see that happening at CCC! :-) |
Keep in mind that while groups seems to be a good idea, it would mean that you will have to put all restricted namespaces (non editable) into a "restricted" group. But i have nothing against the idea ;) |
I thought that you'd like that @mindeffects :-) |
It is only a "manager display thing", @rtripault, as with Form (Manager) Cusomization. Or good ol' Apache's "deny from all" and "allow from xyz". |
See: MODX issue #11448: Assign Namespaces to a Category |
Another one that can be marked as closed, I believe... :-)
|
That ... would ... be ... AWESOME! Have to check it out! |
It's currently not possible to let a client edit lexicon entries and/or system settings only for one namespace (or a list of namespaces).
I often create namespaces just for client-specific lexicons (to store strings that are reused multiple times on a website, which is even more practical with multi-language websites), and I cannot give my client access to those lexicon entries without giving him permission to all the other lexicons. Same goes with system settings.
The "Creative Freedom" of MODX currently ends here :-) It's all or nothing and should be more granular. So it'd be a great enhancement to have ACLs for that, like we already have for resource groups for example.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: