if a user has been granted CVS access to a given project, we should let them edit the project node. this way, they could update the description, fix taxonomy categorization, change the default release, etc, etc. they can already change the code and add releases, might as well give them access to the other settings, huh?
this is in fact incredibly easy to do. i realized that there's nothing release-specific about project_release_access_check(), so i just renamed it and moved it into project.module so it can be shared, and then a few places we were manually doing similar checks, we just use that. this way, we have a single place to define what gives you admin access to a project node.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #5 | project_edit_subtabs.patch_1.txt | 956 bytes | dww |
| #3 | project_check_admin_access.patch_1.txt | 1.65 KB | dww |
| project_check_admin_access.patch.txt | 4.34 KB | dww |
Comments
Comment #1
dwwchx reviewed the patch and said it was RTBC. chx, sepeck and others are in favor of the change. i just committed to DRUPAL-4-7--2. i haven't yet installed on d.o, just in case there's any lingering opposition. if i don't hear anything in the next day or so, up it goes. ;)
Comment #2
webchickHm. I have a nit-pick.
I'm not sure if I particularly want people to whom I gave CVS access rights to be able to _delete_ my project. Edit, sure, but delete?
Comment #3
dwwyup, that seems reasonable to me.
Comment #4
dwwfrom IRC: Heine: looks good
committed to DRUPAL-4-7--2.
Comment #5
dwwthis is actually screwing up the subtabs on the edit node from http://drupal.org/node/96971 when content admins (folks with just "administer nodes" permissions) go to edit project nodes, as opposed to people with cvs access. attached patch fixes this, but using
node_access()(which handles the admin nodes perm) instead of callingproject_check_admin_access()directly.Comment #6
dwwafter quick review from merlin, committed to DRUPAL-4-7--2 and installed on d.o.
Comment #7
dwwthis issue started as a feature... setting back for posterity. ;)
Comment #8
(not verified) commented