Skip to content
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

[Proposal] Access control for Summaries based on Slack account #7

Open
tamano opened this issue Mar 2, 2016 · 6 comments
Open

[Proposal] Access control for Summaries based on Slack account #7

tamano opened this issue Mar 2, 2016 · 6 comments

Comments

@tamano
Copy link
Contributor

tamano commented Mar 2, 2016

Thank you for this nice product.
My team is using Togelack to keep important conversations for later reference.
It improved our communication greatly!

While using, we have noticed that summarizing messages in Private Channel is danger because everyone can read every Summary.

So my proposal is to add access control to each Summaries.
My idea is simple: In Private Mode, When user opening (or listing) a Summary, check all messages in that for their channel and allow him to do it only when he can access to all of them.

How do you think about this idea?
If this sounds nice, I will try to implement this feature.

@rutan
Copy link
Owner

rutan commented Mar 3, 2016

Hi! That sounds nice. but...

My team member have mixed public channel and private group(or his one) messages.
The reason is Togelack cannot to insert supplementary explanations.
(Togelack is inspired by Togetter( http://togetter.com ).
Togetter can insert supplementary explanations by editor.)

So, I'm wondering...
I want to solve both problem.

@tamano
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamano commented Mar 4, 2016

You mean that your team sometime uses message from Private Group to add "supplementary explanations", right?
(That sounds nice, we will try that!)

If my understanding is right, there might be few choices:

  1. Implement "Comment function"
  2. Make rule that specific channel(ex. DM with slackbot or all of DM's or ...) to be excluded from the access control.

I know (2) is a stupid workaround and little bit "Not user friendly" spec but might be easy to realize.
Do you think it acceptable?

Of course, other ideas are welcomed.

@tamano
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamano commented Mar 4, 2016

Oh, I had an another one.

"3. Make a new option ACCESS_CONTROL."

But I don't think this is a good one. I hate too many options 😞

@rutan
Copy link
Owner

rutan commented Mar 5, 2016

supplementary explanations

Yes 😄

I also think (1) is good.
(2) is very difficult to me...

@tamano
Copy link
Contributor Author

tamano commented Mar 9, 2016

Thank you for your comments!

I will first implement access control feature (without 1,2,3) for my team.
After then, I will extend that with (1) and create a PR 😃

@rokoucha
Copy link
Contributor

rokoucha commented Jul 27, 2018

I have implemented access control based on Slack channels/groups.
That implementation is here.

If a summary contains a message in a private channel, the summary can be viewed by the users which belong to the channel.
Each summary can be edited by the users which belongs to all channels in the summary.

However this implementation doesn't contain the "Comment function".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants