Project: Drupal Version: 4.5.0 Component: node system Category: bug reports Priority: critical Assigned to: wazdog Reported by: wazdog Updated by: wazdog Status: patch Ultimately, an "edit" permission would encompass the permission needed in a "rollback revision" permission, as the latter is a subset of the former. Therefore, if a user can edit a node, they should be able to rollback a revision (though deleting a revision should still be a different permission, because it is destructive). wazdog Previous comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ November 1, 2004 - 17:33 : wazdog If you enable revisions for a node type via content > configure > default workflow, and the user who is editing a node of that type doesn't have the administer nodes permission, then a new revision is not created. I see this a huge bug. I am trying to have all edits to a node type saved as revisions (in this case a flexinode, but I also tested with blog types). I want to recreate the book pages, but with more fields (hence, flexinode). But if one of my authenticated users creates a node, and then later edits it, a revision is not made. However, if an admin or moderator (who both have the administer nodes permission) edits the node, a new revision is created. I don't want my regular users to have administer nodes permission, that gives them too much power, but their revisions need to be kept (just like I give them all publish permission via default workflow). If this is supposed to be how it works, what is the point of the default workflow setting? (and why do the other default workflow settings behave differently? i.e. they all apply no matter the users permissions) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ November 3, 2004 - 09:48 : wazdog Attachment: http://drupal.org/files/issues/node-rev.patch (721 bytes) Okay, here's a short little patch. It seems like node_create_revision() was being called before $node->revision was set. Since $node->revision is what tells Drupal whether or not to make a new revision, this was causing nodes to not keep revisions. I moved node_create_revision() to after this check. I'm not sure exactly why only regular users without 'administer nodes' permission were affected, but that seems the case. Now, if a particular node type has 'revision' checked in content > default workflow, a new revision is always created, no matter who is doing the editing... I'm setting this to critical because I think the current behavior goes against logic, and what admins may expect. And if they don't notice it's not working like they expect (i.e. revisions aren't being kept always), then content is lost... The patch is against 4.5.0, but always applies to current cvs (with a slight offset error). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 15, 2005 - 05:54 : mcd I tried this patch against 4.5.1 and it worked, but it took me some time to figure out that it was working because it's still not doing the intuitive thing. The user still can't see the revisions tab unless they have node administration privileges (which makes it unlike the outline tab). They can't see the checkbox to decide whether their edit is a new revision, so every edit they do becomes a revision from which they derive no benefit. I would let them see the revision checkbox and the revisions tab, and also roll back (non-destructively as suggested in http://drupal.org/node/12479). I don't think there is an intuitive way to handle the five node administration Options checkboxes as a group while appearing to enable them separately in the default workflow. I've had similar issues with the defaults, like a page I made sticky coming unstuck every time the owner edited it (with the default non-sticky in the workflow). Now I see why that was happening, but it's still highly counterintuitive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 15, 2005 - 05:56 : mcd Sorry, I didn't mean to change the main title. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 15, 2005 - 06:11 : chx IMHO in some situations it is a good thing if a new revision is created every time a user edits the node. It's not her privilege to roll back, it's something a moderator should do. It'd be even better if the new revision would not be automatically published only after approval by the moderator. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 15, 2005 - 06:18 : mcd Rolling back nondestructively is just a means of editing a page. Why should a user with permission to edit be prevented from that edit? They can certainly do more destructive things. As for creating new revisions every time, it depends on usage patterns. You may not want too many almost indistinguishable revisions collecting in the revisions tab. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 15, 2005 - 07:32 : robertDouglass My opinions: 1. administer nodes is the wrong permission to determine revisions behavior. At least one revision-specific permission is necessary, perhaps two or more (view, create, delete, rollback revisions). 2. If the default workflow says revisions are made, this should definitely make it so that normal users create revisions every time. 3. Users with admin rights (either a revisions specific permission or administer nodes) can override the default. All others should not see the checkbox. 4. Whether revisions are rolled back destructively or non-destructively *could* be a setting, but if not, should be non-destructive by nature as we already have a mechanism for deleting revisions. ----- That much is the minimum I consider necessary to be a useable system. I would additionally wish for the following: 5. Since I would like to have a site where normal users can view any of the revisions, but not delete and not roll back, I would really like to see the following permissions: read revision, rollback revision, delete revision 6. The ability to compare two or more revisions [1] 7. The possibility for moderation of revisions ie. people with administer nodes (or moderate revisions) look at a queue of revisions and rollbacks and approve or disapprove them. 8. The possibility to vote on revisions. 7 could be an extension of 8. If only administrators can vote on revisions, it would be the same as moderating them. I know the last bits sounds like a bunch of pipe dreams, and may be off topic for this thread, but the system I imagine would be for a site where the wording of entries must be considered very carefully by many people and a concensus about the best version be found. The above features would achieve this. [1] http://drupal.org/node/15596 -- View: http://drupal.org/node/12401 Edit: http://drupal.org/project/comments/add/12401