It seems that the "Create New User" button is hidden unless the user has the necessary permissions. This is inconsistent with other applications in which these actions are visible, but greyed out.
Description
Description
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Specifically, PhabricatorPeopleListController has this code:
if ($can_create) { $crumbs->addAction( id(new PHUIListItemView()) ->setName(pht('Create New User')) ->setHref($this->getApplicationURI('create/')) ->setIcon('fa-plus-square')); }
Comment Actions
We don't intend to pursue this direction with crumbs, most create actions will get moved elsewhere.
Comment Actions
... and in any case there are many instances where we don't show users what they don't have permissions to do anything with. I think this approach is correct, since it shows simpler and cleaner UIs to the majority of new/plain users.
Comment Actions
It just seems inconsistent to sometimes hide the button and show a grayed-out button in other places.
Comment Actions
In a lot of cases, a user will have permission on some objects but not on others. For example, you can often "Edit Project" on some projects, but not on others. In these cases, the intended behavior is to always to show the action, but show it with a disabled style if it isn't available on that particular object. This makes the UI more consistent (the same actions are always available, and the actions are always in the same positions) and more discoverable (you can see that the action is available) and more comprehensible (you can click the action to figure out why you aren't allowed to take it).
In some other cases, a user is missing a more fundamental permission (usually "admin" or a similar permission). In some of these cases, we won't show that the action is available. The intent here is usually to simplify interfaces where there's no consistency issue and little value in making the feature discoverable or comprehensible. For example, we remove the "Disable User" and "Make Administrator" options on profiles if you aren't an administrator, because showing that these options exist doesn't seem very useful.
Between these two extremes, there is a spectrum of cases where the behavior is arguable, and we may not have all of these right.
In this case, the value of discovery seems low (it's obvious/intuitive that administrators probably have a way to create users somehow, so specifically knowing where the feature is as a non-administrator doesn't seem very useful) and it doesn't seem to aid in understanding the feature (it's similarly obvious/intuitive that this is a power reserved for administrators).
Comment Actions
I probably have a slight preference for:
- Anything truly "admin only" just disappears for regular users.
- Anything "no permissions" is just grey.
But I don't think we've done that explicitly yet.
Comment Actions
I think we're nearly consistent about that, although @joshuaspence caught at least a few other cases where we're missing the disabled style and there are probably a few cases that are arguable or ambiguous (for instance, user creation is no longer necessarily admin-only, it's just admin-only by default and at-most-admin-only in all reasonable setups we're aware of in the wild).