Scott, is there anyway to give registered users "upload" permission only? If I set the edit module rights to registered users,the can also edit view options and Edit albums. I would like for them to be ables to upload the pics but not be able to edit anything else.

Thanks

Ben

Hi Scott,I donwloaded your source for the simple gallery and did the fix myselft. I just changed the View Options and Edit Albums security level access to admin and left the Add Photo to edit in the gallery.vb. Works like a charm.

thanks for providing the source. Your Gallery rocks!

Ben

Hmmmm, Turning into more of a project than I thought...lol..Im not  a programer at all, But what I wanted to do is to test  to see if security.securityAccessLevel.Admin  is true in the cmdDelete_click event before it would allow deletion of a pic.If not then the control is invisible else visible. That way only admin is able to delete pics. This is in the EditPhoto.ascx.vb

Is this possible ? Could someone post some code if it is?

Thanks

Ben

That would be nice to be able to set access roles to the module. If Registered users can just upload and not be able to delete or edit anything without admin doing it for them.That way they cant go in and delete pics that others upload.

Thanks Scott for the code!(im gonna go stare at it forawhile now

Ben

• Allow Photo Submission (Choose Roles)
• Edit Exisitng Photo(s) (Choose Roles)
  
• Allow Album Creation (Choose Roles)
• Edit Existing Album(s) (Choose Roles)

That would be great..I think you would have an even more popular gallery Module with those enhancements.Total control over it.

Thanks Scott

This would be for the use case where you either want to allow all your users the opportunity to submit photos or don't 100% trust the ppl who you do allow to upload. You can choose to approve photos before they are posted rather than edit\delete them later.

Also, I would consider this a great feature for the simple gallery. As it is a core\architecture type feature.

I would like to see the simple gallery consist of features like this and reserve the extra options to watermark, subcategory, email, slideshow etc... for an enhanced version.

Jason

>>allow all your users the opportunity to submit photos or don't 100% trust the ppl who you do allow to >>upload. You can choose to approve photos before they are posted rather than edit\delete them later.

Agreed, nice suggestion.

Greetings,

I like the idea of the roles previously mentioned.  I would like to make one suggestion/comment.  If someone uploads a picture, I think they should retain the right to delete it.  That way if they upload the wrong picture by mistake they can delete the picture without involving an admin.

I think it's important for folks not to be able to delete pictures that others upload.  For my particular application I don't want folks to look at a picture and say "eww...that's not a good picture of me" and delete the photo.

Regards,

kc

I just bought Ricecheese's Photo album thinking that it would allow Registered users to upload photos without being able to delete others photos.(I went to the demo website but it was down..so could not test).

Anyhow...back to square one...his module does allow for upload of registered users without them being able to edit the album,but they can also delete others users photo too.

I find it hard to believe that no one has implamented security level access down to the photo level.

If you can implent the features suggested here Scott,your Simple Gallery will go through the roof.

Lesson learned....I will just wait on your updates

thanks

Ben

As far as album\module level permissions, my vote would be for module level. It would be a pain to have to reset permissions for each album as you go. Unless, the albums would default to a configurable module level if you don't specifiy per album settings. But then that's really starting to get overly complicated. An easy solution covering the most common likely use case might be to have an 'owner' role. It also allows for a lot of flexibility.

Here is a suggested list of possible features that would need security roles. My suggestion would be to have an additional "role" for owner. So if you are the person who created\uploaded the album or photo, the admin can choose what permissions you have. As far as scope, I assumed module level on all.

CREATE ALBUM
scope: module level
permission options: standard DNN roles

DELETE\EDIT ALBUM
scope: module level
permission options: standard DNN roles and album owner

UPLOAD PHOTO(S)
scope: module level
permission options: standard DNN roles and album owner

DELETE\EDIT PHOTO(S)
scope: module level
permission options: standard DNN roles and album\photo owner

MODERATOR - APPROVE ALBUMS\PHOTOS
scope: module level
permission options: standard DNN roles and album owner

Thank you -- this greatly helps!

The DNN Permissions actually do work in extending them (e.g. permissions table) but when you add to that table it applies to all modules. I hope soon you can add those custom permission at just a module level so you can do things like this very easily.

Hi, the above security models would solve my problems as I have this very issue currently. Multiple users who all need varying levels of access to upload and edit but I wouldn't want them to be able to change settings.

Pushy i know but any idea when we could see this sort of feature?

Thanks