mirror of
https://github.com/BookStackApp/BookStack.git
synced 2026-02-06 00:59:39 +03:00
Change page revision view permission #4208
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 @Bolthier on GitHub (Sep 14, 2023).
Describe the feature you'd like
At the moment the right to view revisions for a page is depending on the standard view permission of a page. This view permission of revisions should not automaticly be given but permitted in the user role.
For example a public user could be restricted to see only the current version. Right now there is a lot of data for every page viewable by external users if you only want them to see the page. Both old content and up to hundred revisions of user data.
Similar to the option "Export content" an option like "View revisions in view-only pages" would be great to restrict this behaviour both for guest and normal users, that have no edit permissions. If a user has edit permissions they should be able to view the revisions regardless of this option.
Describe the benefits this would bring to existing BookStack users
Better managing of available content and data to unauthorized or restricted users. No need to delete revisions to have information in older versions restricted.
Can the goal of this request already be achieved via other means?
No. At least not with a lot of deletions of older revisions, which could be needed for editors of the page.
Have you searched for an existing open/closed issue?
How long have you been using BookStack?
Over 5 years
Additional context
Had a long time running an older bookstack version and finally up to date after a day of migrating to a new webserver. The documentation and workflow of the backup & restore is superb. Had no issues on the documentation part. So now I'm obviously testing all the new great features and looking into open issues I may have somewhere. Keep up the great work!
@ssddanbrown commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2023):
Hello again @Bolthier!
We had #4526 raised just last week, I'm going to re-open that and merge this into that, since that thread has has a bit more development with a few potential workarounds provided.
@Bolthier commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2023):
Sorry for duplicate issue. I was pretty sure I looked into all open issues with revision in its content.
Oh, you re-opened it. Now I get it.