Lack of interest Copy usergroup (with it's permissions)

[Fred.]

I think it would be really useful to be able to copy a usergroup with it's permissions.

Now you always have to set all the permissions again.
Please like if you also find it useful.

 

[Martok]

Permissions are designed to be cumulative across user groups, not having the same permissions in several groups.

https://xenforo.com/community/resources/implementing-permissions-across-multiple-user-groups.358/

 

[Lawrence]

I think it would be really useful to be able to copy a usergroup with it's permissions.

Now you always have to set all the permissions again.
Please like if you also find it useful.

This add-on does what you want:
https://xenforo.com/community/resources/icewind-clone-user-group.2887/

I wrote it for my site, as it will have numerous guilds and orders with basically the same permissions but with minor differences.

 

[Biker]

Permissions are designed to be cumulative across user groups, not having the same permissions in several groups.

While generally this is true, there are times when having the ability to copy a usergroup for private node access would be extremely handy.

 

[Martok]

While generally this is true, there are times when having the ability to copy a usergroup for private node access would be extremely handy.

Not really, you don't have to copy permissions to do this. All that's needed are any permission differences (including the view access). Any permissions which are the same can be left as Not Set (No) as they will be gained from the Registered user group and and other secondary user groups that users are part of.

 

[Fred.]

Ok, thanks everyone. I think I use the permission system the right way. But I'm going to check out Lawrence his add-on.

 

[Alpha1]

Not really, you don't have to copy permissions to do this. All that's needed are any permission differences (including the view access). Any permissions which are the same can be left as Not Set (No) as they will be gained from the Registered user group and and other secondary user groups that users are part of.

How do you see this when you want to have usergroups as a ladder type scheme including banners?

 

[Martok]

How do you see this when you want to have usergroups as a ladder type scheme including banners?

I don't understand what you are asking really. It can be done with the appropriate setup for banner stacking etc.

 

[Alpha1]

For example:

registered usergroup: primary group with basic permissions
usergroup 1: limited permissions + unique banner
usergroup 2: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 3: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 4: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 5: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 6: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 7: adds specific permissions + stackable banner

Users are gradually promoted from 1 to 2 until they reach usergroup 6. This is what I mean with a ladder.

Normally I a user would only be a member of 'registered' + one of the usergroups 1-6 + optional usergroup 7.
For such a setup I would need to copy usergroups. But you suggest a different approach. So how would you do the above?

 

[Daniel Hood]

How do you see this when you want to have usergroups as a ladder type scheme including banners?

Use secondary groups instead of changing the primary group. Lets say you have "Regular Members" as your registered group, keep everyone in there. These members can all read but can't post (for an example). Then "Level 1" could be a secondary group which they get to after a certain point, they can post but can't edit. Then "Level 2" secondary group has the ability to edit.

Now let's say "Member A" is a level 2 member, they should be in primary group "Regular Members" (or "Registered"), with secondary groups of "Level 1" (so they can post), and "Level 2" so they can edit.

 

[Alpha1]

The registered group is the primary group.

 

[Daniel Hood]

Just read your other post,

For example:

registered usergroup: basic permissions
usergroup 1: limited permissions + unique banner
usergroup 2: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 3: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 4: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 5: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 6: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 7: adds specific permissions + stackable banner

Users are gradually promoted from 1 to 2 until they reach usergroup 6. This is what I mean with a ladder.

Normally I a user would only be a member of 'registered' + one of the usergroups 1-6 + optional usergroup 7.
For such a setup I would need to copy usergroups. But you suggest a different approach. So how would you do the above?

Instead of tying the differences in permissions and unique banners all to the same group, make permission groups with no banners. Then make groups for just banners.

 

[Alpha1]

It seems much easier to just copy group 1 to group 2 to create group 2 and just change the few things that need to be different.

 

[Daniel Hood]

It seems much easier to just copy group 1 to group 2 to create group 2 and just change the few things that need to be different.

It's just a very different way of doing things. It's hard to transition to when you're used to the old vB way for so long.

 

[Martok]

For example:

registered usergroup: primary group with basic permissions
usergroup 1: limited permissions + unique banner
usergroup 2: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 3: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 4: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 5: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 6: same permissions as previous, but a few differences + unique banner
usergroup 7: adds specific permissions + stackable banner

Users are gradually promoted from 1 to 2 until they reach usergroup 6. This is what I mean with a ladder.

Normally I a user would only be a member of 'registered' + one of the usergroups 1-6 + optional usergroup 7.
For such a setup I would need to copy usergroups. But you suggest a different approach. So how would you do the above?

You'd set it like this:

Registered group
'Small permissions difference' group
user group 1 - no permissions + unique banner
user group 2 - no permissions + unique banner
user group 3 - no permissions + unique banner
user group 4 - no permissions + unique banner
user group 5 - no permissions + unique banner
user group 6 - no permissions + unique banner
user group 7 - specific permissions (which aren't replicated from the Registered or 'Small permissions difference' group) + stackable banner

This is one additional user group to your set up.

As members are moved from Registered only, they would then be in Registered + 'Small permissions difference' + one of user groups 1 - 6 + user group 7.

It seems much easier to just copy group 1 to group 2 to create group 2 and just change the few things that need to be different.

But it's not, and here's why.

XenForo adds a new permission to the core (or you decide to change a permission that you want your user groups to have/not have). In your setup, you have to change that permission in 6 groups. In my setup (based on cumulative permissions) you would only have to change the permission once in one group, the 'Small permissions difference' group.

Doing it this way, there's less work and far less change of mucking up permissions as you don't have to make sure the same permissions are set in multiple groups.

 

[Alpha1]

Thanks @Martok that makes a lot of sense. I still have one question: considering that group 1-6 in my example each need unique permission differences, it seems to me that I would still need a number of 'small permissions difference' groups?

 

[Martok]

Thanks @Martok that makes a lot of sense. I still have one question: considering that group 1-6 in my example each need unique permission differences, it seems to me that I would still need a number of 'small permissions difference' groups?

If the permissions are unique to one group only then no, you wouldn't need the 'small permissions difference' group, you would set the permissions in each usergroup but *only* the differences, not the other permissions that are already in the Registered group. If there are permissions that are common to groups 1 - 6 that you don't want the Registered group to have, then you would have a separate user group for that. In this scenario you would end up with:

Registered
'Common permissions' group
User group 1 (with unique permissions + unique banner)
...
...
User group 6 (with unique permissions + unique banner)
user group 7 - specific permissions (which aren't replicated from the Registered or 'Common permissions difference' or other user groups) + stackable banner

Members would then be in:

Registered + Common permissions group + one of user groups 1 - 6 + user group 7.

 

[Kintaro]

XF2.1 version:

Unmaintained - [EAE Add-ons] Admin Tools

Edit: See updates for more features and screen shots. This add-on adds a couple of new features and conveniences for administrators, such as: clone user groups, collapsed permission sets (if 'all' is not selected) when analyzing global...

xenforo.com