| *** mrmartin has joined #storyboard | 04:52 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 06:01 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #storyboard | 06:01 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 08:16 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #storyboard | 08:16 | |
| Zara | morning, storyboard! | 08:47 |
|---|---|---|
| * SotK tries to think of the best way to decide whether to show a read-only board or an editable one | 12:00 | |
| Zara | guessing there's some added complexity to having an authorised list of users and doing 'if user is in list of users'? | 12:08 |
| persia | I think boards/worklists should only be editable by owners. | 12:10 |
| persia | There are very few organisational structures where several people jointly define worklists that are not subject to contention (of which avoidance is the main point of multidimensional priorities) | 12:11 |
| SotK | I'd like boards to be able to be edited by multiple people though | 12:11 |
| Zara | yeah, seems like different people should have different levels of permission for boards? | 12:12 |
| Zara | some people would just be authorised to move 'thier' cards | 12:12 |
| persia | Hm. I suppose that makes sense, from a team coordination perspective. From a worklist perspective, it's an easy answer, but for team collaboration on a kanban, lots of people would have to change work habits to have owner-only editable boards. | 12:12 |
| Zara | (er, their.) | 12:12 |
| Zara | yeah. I think only the owner should be able to delete a board, or rename it, etc. | 12:13 |
| persia | Also, only the owner should be able to change the composition, reorder worklists as "lanes", rename worklists as "lanes", etc. | 12:13 |
| SotK | hmm, why only owner for those things? | 12:16 |
| * SotK has so far been imagining "owner can archive, users with edit permissions can change board metadata, change lanes, and move cards, users with no permissions can only view | 12:17 | |
| SotK | (for a public board that is) | 12:17 |
| Zara | (is it possible for boards to have joint ownership?) I was thinking of situations where you have people in charge of a project but anyone can contribute and be part of the board; someone new accidentally deleting a lane. | 12:17 |
| Zara | or even sabotage. seems a bit farfetched but who knows. | 12:19 |
| SotK | a board is owned by the person who created it at the moment | 12:19 |
| Zara | I'd like it if it were possible to extend ownership to as many people as the owner is okay with, but I don't know how tough that'd be to implement | 12:20 |
| Zara | I'm imagining situations where project hasn't got too many core maintainers, say, and someone goes on holiday. | 12:21 |
| persia | My thought was that certain metadata encodes the structure of the board, and that users of a board don't need to do quite as many things (certainly not change the structure), but they may want to be able to move things between "lanes". | 12:23 |
| persia | But I'm not that much of a kanban user, so I am only imagining things. | 12:23 |
| persia | For ownership changes / group ownership: I agree that holiday/bus features may be useful. | 12:25 |
| SotK | OK then, so multi-tiered permissions are needed after all then | 12:28 |
| SotK | (I'm sure I was talked out of it in the past, but may be misremembering, or have been talked out of it by myself) | 12:28 |
| Zara | I think they're definitely needed for boards, though not for worklists. | 12:29 |
| SotK | so we want "Owner: do all the things", "User: move cards", "None: just look"? | 12:29 |
| SotK | Should there be something in between Owner and User? | 12:30 |
| Zara | I'd say 'User: move and edit cards assigned to them' but there could be other things I've missed. | 12:30 |
| SotK | since cards are just tasks or stories, they can do that anyway :) | 12:30 |
| Zara | ah, cool, as long as they can do it from the board page that's fine. | 12:31 |
| Zara | I don' tthink anything's necessary between owner and user unless joint-ownership isn't possible | 12:31 |
| * SotK is convinced that joint ownership needs to be possible now :) | 12:31 | |
| Zara | :D | 12:32 |
| persia | Without names, I think the permissions are "do all the things" and "add/remove stories from a worklist" | 12:32 |
| persia | I have no strong opiinon on what to call those. | 12:32 |
| SotK | OK then, that should be pretty simple to implement | 12:34 |
| *** CTtpollard has joined #storyboard | 12:36 | |
| persia | Err, Apologies: it's three "all the things", "add/remove", "none" | 12:37 |
| persia | Err, no four: "all the things", "add/remove", "view", "none". | 12:37 |
| * persia hopes not to Err again | 12:37 | |
| SotK | persia: do you see a use-case for someone being able to view a private board but not add/remove from it? | 12:39 |
| persia | Not clearly, but I do see a use case for a subset of people being able to add/remove from a public board. | 12:54 |
| SotK | yep, I don't plan to make public boards publically editable (unless people think that would be a useful option?) | 12:56 |
| Zara | might depend on the project. don't really know. maybe it would become a weird alternative to twitch plays pokemon. | 12:58 |
| persia | The thought driving the Errs was that there were really four levels of things that could be done: whether this actually requires four sorts of permission depends on the implementation. I don't have any issue with an implementation that forces certain permissions to be conflated for certain classes of boards, so long as that implementation is simpler than one that doesn't force it. | 12:59 |
| persia | Hardcoding permissions for the sake of doing so strikes me as reducing flexibility at a cost of higher maintenance, which isn't usually a good tradeoff. | 13:00 |
| persia | Whereas if the code is simpler by forcing things, that's fine, until someone complains. | 13:00 |
| *** krotscheck has quit IRC | 15:33 | |
| *** krotscheck has joined #storyboard | 15:34 | |
| * SotK tries to figure out the best way to deal with needing multi-level permissions on worklists | 15:40 | |
| * SotK fails | 15:45 | |
| SotK | I guess I can hardcode names for the permissions, so `edit-worklist-contents` and `edit-worklist-metadata` or something like that | 15:57 |
| * SotK isn't sure how much he likes that idea | 15:57 | |
| *** CTtpollard has quit IRC | 15:58 | |
| *** MarkAtwood_ has joined #storyboard | 17:00 | |
| *** krotscheck has quit IRC | 18:34 | |
| *** krotscheck has joined #storyboard | 18:36 | |
| *** krotscheck has quit IRC | 18:39 | |
| *** krotscheck has joined #storyboard | 18:40 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| *** mrmartin has quit IRC | 20:27 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #storyboard | 21:16 | |
| *** mrmartin has joined #storyboard | 21:47 | |
| *** mrmartin has quit IRC | 21:51 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| *** openstackgerrit has joined #storyboard | 22:02 | |
| *** mrmartin has joined #storyboard | 22:08 | |
| *** mrmartin has quit IRC | 22:13 | |
| *** openstack has joined #storyboard | 22:33 | |
| *** openstackstatus has quit IRC | 22:47 | |
| *** openstack has joined #storyboard | 22:47 | |
| *** openstackstatus has joined #storyboard | 22:49 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +v openstackstatus | 22:49 | |
| *** MarkAtwood_ has quit IRC | 23:54 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!