John, have you ever considered changing the name "developer" to "designer"? I think it'd be more clear.

Also, I'd think clarity could be further improved by:

   * Showing that there is a Basic user privilege level that is applied
     when Administrator and Developer are not checked.  It's not always
     clear that you still get something when all the options are
     unchecked and it's certainly not clear what that "something" is
     permitted to do. (Perhaps a name like "Writer" or "Author" would

   * Currently, Radiant's permission structure has 3 permission levels
     -- each with progressively more authority (i.e. Developer = Basic
     User + Unique Developer Powers and Administrator = Developer +
     Unique Admin Powers).  So checking Administrator *and* Developer
     makes no sense -- yet today this is an option.  That's really
     where this thread's question comes from.

     I can think of several ways to prevent this confusion to users but
     first the decision needs to be made whether this progression of
     powers is the best approach or whether roles should only consist
     of their unique capabilities (i.e. Admin just includes permissions
     to edit Users and Extension not any Developer stuff -- to get
     those privileges, you'd need to add the Developer role to your
     user).  I'm used to the former since that's what we have today but
     I can think of cases where I'd have an Admin who doesn't have
     Developer privileges.  The latter method is also more extensible
     since others may add roles that don't fit the subset/superset


John W. Long wrote:
On Jun 21, 2008, at 4:21 PM, Alex Wayne wrote:
Are my assumptions right?  I just want to be sure that in my public
extensions I am exposing the right sections to the right users.


An administrator is a superuser. A developer can do everything, but create and edit other users. The two roles are really more akin to "root" and "designer".

John Long
Radiant mailing list

Radiant mailing list

Reply via email to