Some quick ??????'s

jamzyamz
jamzyamz's picture

Joined: 2004-01-12
Posts: 154
Posted: Fri, 2004-09-24 19:43

I am playing with G2 and genrally loving it.

I do notice though that I have show owner for album, and galleries turned off but it still shows gallery admin as owner. Also is there a way (or will there be) to not show filenames, date added, views etc.. I don't want any text just the thumbs.

Also any idea what's causing the whole page to shift if browser is smaller than the width of the pic. This one thing is highly annoying.

Are there any plans to be able to link galleries themselves to other albums, instead of just images?

L:astly, what happened to the hide feature? I need this back.

Otherwise everything works great.
Thanks

 
jamzyamz
jamzyamz's picture

Joined: 2004-01-12
Posts: 154
Posted: Fri, 2004-09-24 21:33

Must be an IE thing because it doesn't occur in Firefox. Same for the xlogo problem.

 
bharat
bharat's picture

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994
Posted: Fri, 2004-09-24 21:45
jamzyamz wrote:
I do notice though that I have show owner for album, and galleries turned off but it still shows gallery admin as owner. Also is there a way (or will there be) to not show filenames, date added, views etc.. I don't want any text just the thumbs.

I can't reproduce that. Let's make sure we're talking about the same problem. I have album A that contains album B. When I look at A, I see B's thumbnail and it says ("Owner: admin"). I edit album A and in its layout settings, tell it not to show owners. I go back to A, and now the thumbnail for B doesn't have the owner next to it.

We may add support to the Matrix layout to hide everything. Would you please file a RFE about that? Thanks.

jamzyamz wrote:
Also any idea what's causing the whole page to shift if browser is smaller than the width of the pic. This one thing is highly annoying.

That's what happens when you don't use tables. You can't portably specify a minimum width so it shifts things around. I don't know of a solution for this, unfortunately.

jamzyamz wrote:
Are there any plans to be able to link galleries themselves to other albums, instead of just images?

I don't understand. Right now you can link images. Are you asking if you we're planning on allowing you to link albums? (the answer is yes). As for linking actual other Galleries, probably not.

jamzyamz wrote:
Lastly, what happened to the hide feature? I need this back.

I took that feature out behind the woodshed and shot it. It's never coming back. Use the permissions interface to take away permissions as appropriate, instead.

 
jamzyamz
jamzyamz's picture

Joined: 2004-01-12
Posts: 154
Posted: Fri, 2004-09-24 23:08

Added the RFE for hiding text

The page shifting does not occur in firefox. Perhaps it's something exclusive to IE?

Yes I did mean albums, not galleries.

Bummer about the hide feature. Prolly could have been used for the other feature I am looking for where you can use a date to publish albums. Hide album untill this date type thing.

Thanks for the fast response :)

 
mindless
mindless's picture

Joined: 2004-01-04
Posts: 8601
Posted: Fri, 2004-09-24 23:48
Quote:
Bummer about the hide feature. Prolly could have been used for the other feature I am looking for where you can use a date to publish albums. Hide album untill this date type thing.

I think "add view permission to Everybody on this date" type thing oughta work :)

 
jamzyamz
jamzyamz's picture

Joined: 2004-01-12
Posts: 154
Posted: Sat, 2004-09-25 02:16

lol, yeah however it can be gone I don't care :) tell me though, why was hide such a hated thing to warrant such violence? :D

 
bharat
bharat's picture

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994
Posted: Sat, 2004-09-25 03:26
jamzyamz wrote:
lol, yeah however it can be gone I don't care :) tell me though, why was hide such a hated thing to warrant such violence? :D

The problem with the hide feature is that it's not really security. It's just another form of obscurity that causes all kinds of issues. For example, if you're searching for comments, should you be allowed to see comments on hidden items? They're not really private -- they're just obscured so why not? But some people want hidden things to be more secure than that -- they want to prevent casual access from anything below that point. That causes huge problems when you try to write the SQL that will figure out if an item deep in the hierarchy has any parents that are hidden and make it part of a permission based join. Right now we can do it in one query, which makes paging very reliable and normal. Same applies for counting items, and a variety of other places where we have to make the show/hide decision on an item.

The better solution is to enforce real security. If you want somebody to see an image, they can see it. If you don't want them to see it, then as far as they're concerned it's as if the item never existed.

 
fryfrog

Joined: 2002-10-30
Posts: 3236
Posted: Sat, 2004-09-25 10:17

Would it be possible to insert a sort of "compatability" layer? You could have a "hide" drop down option BUT, instead of doing crazy things... it would just be a shortcut to make the permissions to "view by admin/owner only".

Did I explain that in a way that makes sense? :)

 
bharat
bharat's picture

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994
Posted: Sat, 2004-09-25 20:19
fryfrog wrote:
Would it be possible to insert a sort of "compatability" layer? You could have a "hide" drop down option BUT, instead of doing crazy things... it would just be a shortcut to make the permissions to "view by admin/owner only".

Yup, that makes sense. It would be easy to add this in the core module, or add a new module that gives you this shortcut. Probably better to do it in a "grab bag" or "gallery 1 things they left out" type of module though so that we don't clutter up the core module.

 
jamzyamz
jamzyamz's picture

Joined: 2004-01-12
Posts: 154
Posted: Sun, 2004-09-26 23:23

Just wondering, what would be the best way to hide the albums using permissions. I want everone to be able to see everything (except the hidden albums) without having to register, so how would I be able to hide just certain albums? does this work for albums with sub albums as well? or would I have to add perms to each album, and it's sub-albums?

Let me know Step by step so I understand it.

I really love gallery, 1.x was great and 2 is absolutley stunning!

 
bharat
bharat's picture

Joined: 2002-05-21
Posts: 7994
Posted: Mon, 2004-09-27 09:15

Permission in G2 apply to each item individually, regardless of where they are in the tree. So if you have Album A -> Album B -> Photo C and you don't want people to see B or C, you can edit the permissions of album B and remove the "[core] View..." permissions from the album. Check the "apply this change to sub-items" and it will also make C inaccessible. Then you can grant view permissions to whoever you want to allow to see it.

 
jamzyamz
jamzyamz's picture

Joined: 2004-01-12
Posts: 154
Posted: Mon, 2004-09-27 14:32

I created a new group called hidden, this was not a valid name, then tried adding user hidden, get same error. I guess I have to use an existing group to do this?

What is the step by step in changing a albums permissions so that it remains hidden to all but admin?

I am muddling through it, but getting no where :)

Thanks

 
mindless
mindless's picture

Joined: 2004-01-04
Posts: 8601
Posted: Mon, 2004-09-27 15:41

When you install G2 the root album has "View all" permission for the "Everybody" group (Everybody includes guest user). To "hide" something you can remove the View all permission from Everybody group on any item/album. If you make this change on an album you can check the "apply to subitems" checkbox to hide all subitems and subalbums too.
Another example (to show how permissions can do more than the simple G1 hide feature) is to remove just "View original version" permission from Everybody group and add "View original version" to All Users group. Now guest users can't see full sized images for the item(s)/album(s) you changed, but anyone logged in can see them.