mirror of
https://github.com/BookStackApp/BookStack.git
synced 2026-02-05 08:39:55 +03:00
Add ability to share elements with 'unique' URL #249
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @alex2702 on GitHub (Jan 29, 2017).
Desired Feature:
It would be great to have a way to share single books/chapters/pages with a single party without requiring them to have an account. I realize it is possible to just make an element available to the public but this is not a great solution if I want to share content with multiple parties. Let‘s say I want to share book A with person X and book B with person Y. I don‘t think there is a way to do this without sharing books A and B with X and Y by making both books publicly available.
What I am thinking about is an obscured link with a hash like Google Docs does it.
I haven't been using BookStack for too long, so maybe I'm missing a clever way to achieve this with the existing permission system?
@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Jan 30, 2017):
@wutfan Thanks for this request. I agree this would be a great feature and there's not currently a way to do this.
@tomershvueli commented on GitHub (Jul 8, 2019):
I would also love to see this functionality!
@cunba-ai commented on GitHub (Jul 9, 2019):
3227cef715Hijack the authenticate and bypass the url prefix '/books/', '/search/', '/uploads/images/', set the permission of one book to public, close global 'public access', and I have this feature with minimum code changes.
Hope for the official implements with QRCode url.
@jrnp97 commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2022):
Any update? :)
@sense-design commented on GitHub (Mar 31, 2022):
This would be a great feature
@Jeremylepr commented on GitHub (Apr 9, 2022):
This feature really need to be implemented.
@Shootify commented on GitHub (May 19, 2022):
yes please...
@caydenmb commented on GitHub (May 19, 2022):
Agreed, I would utilize this feature a lot.
@Dylan-Miles commented on GitHub (Nov 22, 2022):
This feature would be very useful!
@aware2 commented on GitHub (Mar 22, 2023):
+1 for this feature ❤️
@onthebackof commented on GitHub (May 21, 2023):
Would be great 👍
@mfx-jgoetzinger commented on GitHub (May 31, 2023):
+1
@artworklv commented on GitHub (May 31, 2023):
I totally agree, having the ability to share things using a unique URL would be an excellent feature to have!
@scaphandroid commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2023):
+1 !
@skarados commented on GitHub (Nov 30, 2023):
Yes please! +1!
@chdcomputers commented on GitHub (Dec 5, 2023):
I also agree and I would like to add the following ideas:
Cheers!
@lucas-strummer commented on GitHub (Mar 11, 2024):
+1! Thank you!
@Limerick-gh commented on GitHub (Mar 11, 2024):
+1
That would be missing piece to establish Bookstack within my department, since we don't want the hassle of username/password authentication with the end-users.
@DanMundy commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2024):
+1
@DerMilderJoghurt commented on GitHub (Apr 4, 2024):
+1
@fegrue commented on GitHub (May 26, 2024):
+1
@virtadpt commented on GitHub (May 27, 2024):
This would be really helpful - kind of like the sharable links that Wallabag has.
@megaxorg commented on GitHub (Aug 22, 2024):
Would be great
@prplk commented on GitHub (Sep 21, 2024):
+1
@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Oct 12, 2024):
Been trying to think this through so just jotting down my thoughts so they're not stuck in my head.
Proposal
Permission Complications
@bmoellerTS commented on GitHub (Oct 23, 2024):
ich würde mich über diese Funktion auch sehr freuen
@Thoroslives commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2024):
This feature is a must for me, I often make small little docs to share but have to export them at the moment as there's no way to share the individual doc with only that person without allowing all public to view all docs (this is without creating an account etc)
@CarrnellTech commented on GitHub (Oct 30, 2024):
+1
@cgct commented on GitHub (Nov 14, 2024):
+1
@edersong commented on GitHub (Dec 10, 2024):
It's the only feature that this awesome application is lacking of 😀
@LegendaryFire commented on GitHub (Dec 10, 2024):
Just search this up and ran across this thread actually, definitely a +1 from me as well.
@vytas911 commented on GitHub (Jan 16, 2025):
would be much appreciated +1
@netAction commented on GitHub (Jan 19, 2025):
+1
The discussed features are much more than the desired features. Google Docs does not add any code to the share URL. You simply share the regular URL of that document. Viewing a shared Google Docs page is like Bookstack without shelves and books overview page. The guest role should have an option to disable "recent activity" panel, "recent pages" panel and /books.
Pro: The URL of a page is always the same. Everyone has the same deep link. Sharing can be done with the already existing guest role functionality. External users can use links between all books and pages until they reach something that is not shared with public.
Con: The names of books can be guessed. If your project's documentation has the url /books/alice, you know there will be something at /books/bob and /books/cindy. Easy fix: Always add a code to book URLs in case they might be shared later.
@netAction commented on GitHub (Jan 20, 2025):
A simplification of the proposal from @ssddanbrown:
Yes to the menu but it could just create a reading permission for the guest group
I don't like multiple URLs for the same content very much and don't think it's neccessary.
Sounds great and would make Bookstack usable as poor man's CMS. Like for documentations.
Stripping out the lists of recent changes, list of books etc. even hides books that the receiver of the URL should not see. The minimal UI differentiates the books from each other.
Another reason for keeping the existing URLs. The OP mentioned Google Docs and they keep the URL too. Editors could even link between books.
This feature is useful and would be versatile if it would not cover share links but all group permissions.
Yes! A share link feels like guest group access anyway. It could simply be guest access.
As a security feature, a random code could be added to every new book/chapter/page path. Just a random string at the end like /books/holiday-plans/page/trip-df5g6df5g6
The security might be even a reason against dedicated share links. Because share links can't hide one page of a shared book. Group access rules can.
@yrosman commented on GitHub (May 6, 2025):
+1
@Thoroslives commented on GitHub (May 9, 2025):
Is there any progress on this feature request? I feel its a big one and its not received any response from the dev for a good long while
@matteosavio commented on GitHub (May 10, 2025):
+1
@MundMBo commented on GitHub (Jun 12, 2025):
+1
@Kofl commented on GitHub (Jan 4, 2026):
+1