Ability to set SSL and Login Requrted options for Sections in Catalog

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Dmitry A.

unread,
Sep 27, 2011, 1:59:03 PM9/27/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
Hi guys,

I propose to add a new SSL and Login Required options for Sections (non-templates - they have tags).

This can be done using check-boxes and will help us to make these settings quickly.

It will be TURNED OFF in Simple Admin Interface.


Here is task:

399: SSL + Login Required options for Sections



DA

Dmitry A.

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 11:53:35 PM10/13/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
Hi guys,


What about this task?

Do you think we need this for 5.2.0? I vote - Yes, what about you?


DA

Phil -- wbtc.fr --

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 2:59:57 AM10/14/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
sounds cool, just a question, what do you mean by "Login Required options for Sections " (non-template)? What is a non-template section, and what's the difference with actual set of permissions under "Permissions" tab? I'm sure there's something I didn't got :)

2011/10/14 Dmitry A. <dand...@gmail.com>

Alexander Obuhovich

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 3:53:35 AM10/14/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
All sections (formerly pages & categories) are divided into 2 groups:
  1. virtual - pages, that admin manually added via "Add Section" toolbar button in catalog (have yellow icon in grid)
  2. template - pages, that are created automatically during theme file scan to match any TPL file, that is present in theme directory (red icon in grid)
These are values of "Type" field on section editing page by the way.


The main difference between virtual and template type of sections is, that "template" type sections use each own TPL to show their content (and you can place m_RequireLogin on it safely), but "virtual" type sections all use the same template (called design template) to show their content, but each of the pages just have different content block data to display on it.

This way by placing m_RequireLogin tag on a design template you'll end up with all pages using it become login-required.



Dmitry proposition is to add "Require Login" and "Require SSL" checkboxes to section properties for user/developer to be able to specify these settings for each section individually no matter, that they use single design template to display their data.

Phil -- wbtc.fr --

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 4:34:28 AM10/14/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
thanks for so many details.

Stating that we have "Permissions" tab to select or unselect "View" permissions for each groups, I would recommend to place these checkboxes under "Permissions" tab, "In-Portal" sub-tab, to avoid any confusion between "View" permissions, and this new "Login" permission, and have all permissions-related things in the same place.
It's also better not to mix same type of features in different tabs, isn't it?


2011/10/14 Alexander Obuhovich <aik....@gmail.com>

Alexander Obuhovich

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 6:26:52 AM10/14/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
There are 2 types of permissions:
  • category-based - edited on Permissions tab of section editing page
  • non-category-based - edited on Permissions tab of group editing
Whatever or not is user logged-in on site isn't a permission actually, but LOGIN non-category-based permission is used to detect if user is allowed to login on site or not.

Require SSL isn't related to permissions at all.

Also we try to keep first half of section Permissions tab as small as possible to allow more permissions to be shown at bottom part.

Dmitry A.

unread,
Oct 16, 2011, 1:04:58 AM10/16/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
Thanks for detailization Alex!

So, are you for this or against adding to 5.2.0 Advanced Interface?


DA

Alexander Obuhovich

unread,
Oct 16, 2011, 8:46:46 AM10/16/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
I have no problems with adding these 2 new checkboxes on section editing screen (along with tons of others checkboxes there) in 5.2.0.

Redesign of section editing screen is question to be discussed in another discussion.

Dmitry A.

unread,
Oct 16, 2011, 7:01:40 PM10/16/11
to in-por...@googlegroups.com
Agreed!

I have moved this into 5.2.0 and assigned to myself.

I'll provide a patch in a near future


DA
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages