Defect #31010
open
The query visibility option "To me only" actually behaves as "To the owner only"
0%
Description
If you change the display range of a shared custom query created by another person to "Only me", only creator can be used instead of me.
When changing the Visibility of a custom query created by someone from "to these roles only" to "to me only"
It becomes available only to the custom query creator, not the one who is manipulating it.
It seems that display content is wrong and it leads to erroneous operation.
It may be better to change from "to me only" to "to author only".
Redmine3.4.6
Files
Related issues
Updated by Yuuki NARA about 5 years ago
Steps to reproduce:
admin:
1.Create user-A and user-B.
Do not assign admin privileges.
2.Assign the following authority of the project to user-A, user-B.
Reference to issue
Custom query creation
Custom query management
(Save Query, Manage Public Query)
user-A:
3.Create custom queries shared within PJ.
visibility:[to these roles only]
user-B:
4.Edit the shared custom query created by user-A.
Change "Visible" from [to these roles only] to [to me only] and save.
This operation is intended to make it available only to me (user-B).
Result: Only user-A becomes available.
The userid of queries table points to user-A.
Updated by Go MAEDA about 5 years ago
- Subject changed from If you change the display range of a shared custom query created by another person to "Only me", only creator can be used instead of me. to The query visibility option "To me only" actually behaves as "To the owner only"
- Category set to Issues
- Status changed from New to Confirmed
I have confirmed the problem. It is confusing in some cases. I agree to change the string from "to me only" to "to the owner only" or "to the author only".
Updated by Go MAEDA almost 4 years ago
- Target version set to Candidate for next minor release
The following is the suggestion of new messages. Feedback are welcome.
diff --git a/config/locales/en.yml b/config/locales/en.yml
index 89fd151c4..aab925da2 100644
--- a/config/locales/en.yml
+++ b/config/locales/en.yml
@@ -1004,7 +1004,7 @@ en:
label_cross_project_hierarchy: With project hierarchy
label_cross_project_system: With all projects
label_gantt_progress_line: Progress line
- label_visibility_private: to me only
+ label_visibility_private: to the owner only
label_visibility_roles: to these roles only
label_visibility_public: to any users
label_link: Link
diff --git a/config/locales/ja.yml b/config/locales/ja.yml
index 2099764cf..7fd56ca57 100644
--- a/config/locales/ja.yml
+++ b/config/locales/ja.yml
@@ -1100,7 +1100,7 @@ ja:
notice_account_not_activated_yet: アカウントが有効化されていません。アカウントを有効にするためのメールをもう一度受信したいときは<a href="%{url}">このリンクをクリックしてください</a>。
notice_account_locked: アカウントがロックされています
label_hidden: 非表示
- label_visibility_private: 自分のみ
+ label_visibility_private: 作成者のみ
label_visibility_roles: 次のロールのみ
label_visibility_public: すべてのユーザー
field_must_change_passwd: 次回ログイン時にパスワード変更を強制
Updated by Go MAEDA almost 4 years ago
- Target version changed from Candidate for next minor release to Candidate for next major release
Updated by Go MAEDA almost 4 years ago
The phrase "to the owner only" is not so good in the new query form. In that form, the current "to me only" is more appropriate, I think. We should find a better phrase.
Updated by Mischa The Evil over 2 years ago
I think that a more appropriate labeling in English would read something like this:
| Label: | Label: | Label: | |
|---|---|---|---|
On Query#new |
to me only | to all users | to users with these roles only |
On Query#edit |
to the author only | to all users | to users with these roles only |
Updated by Mischa The Evil over 2 years ago
- Related to Defect #7768: improve consistency of terms / language added
Updated by Go MAEDA over 2 years ago
Mischa The Evil wrote:
I think that a more appropriate labeling in English would read something like this:
Label: Label: Label: On Query#newto me only to all users to users with these roles only On Query#editto the author only to all users to users with these roles only
+1
I think using different terms for Query#new and Query#edit is a good idea.
Updated by Go MAEDA 2 months ago
- File 31010.patch 31010.patch added
The attached 31010.patch implements #note-6.