Repository navigation
Conversation
…nable authors The picker shows no avatar, /authors sorts by name or email rather than name then email, and the email question gains the editorial comments RFC's choice to never return email from its mention list.
Follows the editorial comments RFC's mention list: id, name and avatar only. Users without a name show as "Unnamed user", search matches names only, and unnamed users sort last.
The goal said an Editor learns nothing beyond each user's name and avatar, but the response also carries the user's ID, and being in the list shows that a user is active and can write content.
…ble authors The list of reasons left out authors an Admin picked from today's full user list (Subscribers) and author IDs set through the update route, which accepts any ID. "Newly invited" also read as a pending invite, which has no user row yet and so is not in the new list either.
Editors get IDs, names and avatars of every user who can create content without users:read. The accepted revision history plan (#4127) shows only the ID and name of revision authors to anyone who can read drafts, so the bullet names those two fields rather than claiming the same fields.
|
🚀 Deploying Preview to Cloudflare 🚀Preview URL: https://daniel-design-assignable-authors.try.emdashcms.com, https://daniel-design-assignable-authors-emdash-playground.emdash-cms.workers.dev (commit c2ecd6d)This URL reflects your latest Preview deploymentPreview Deployments by commit
|
github-actions
Bot
added
the
query-count changed
Contributor
Query-count snapshot changes20 routes changed, total Δ +66 queries. D1
Comparing snapshot files between base and head. Updated automatically on each push. |
github-actions
Bot
added
size/M
type/design
review/needs-review
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Design proposal
Proposal: proposals/assignable-authors.md
Editors may change an entry's author, but the admin never shows them the author picker. The picker loads its user list from
/admin/users, which only Admins may read, so for an Editor the request fails and the Ownership section stays hidden. This plan addsGET /_emdash/api/content/{collection}/assignable-authors, gated oncontent:edit_any, the permission the server already checks before an update may change the author. It returns the ID, name and avatar of active users who can create content, and the picker uses it for Admins and Editors alike./admin/usersstays Admin-only.The plan adds one route and changes no stored data, permission or existing response, so it is filed as a feature plan. The route returns names but never email, so another user without a name shows as "Unnamed user".
Proposal type
Related work
Discussion: none. The custom roles RFC (#4156) lists this gap, and its first phase stops the admin offering what the server refuses. With this route the server answers the picker's request, so that phase keeps the picker. The RFC scopes content permissions to collections, so the route sits under the collection.
The editorial comments RFC (#4126) plans a user list for mentions that leaves email out, and this route does the same. The Co-owners idea (#4132) puts a field under Ownership where an Editor picks users, so it needs the same section and a user list that Editors can read.
Readiness
accepted(check only when ready to merge)AI assistance