08:59 <efishta> I created a collection, added a couple of grains, created a VIEW ONLY link to the collection, and I'm finding that whoever has access to that link has editing rights to each grain. In other words, the "VIEW ONLY" limitation is for the collection, not the actual rights within the grains themselves. I'd expect rights to carry through.

09:01 <kentonv> efishta, yes, unfortunately, the collections app does not have any understanding of the permissions that apply to other apps, so the links within it give exactly the same permissions to everyone.

09:02 <efishta> I see. So the assumption is that collections are for a set group of trusted, EDIT RIGHTS users

09:02 <kentonv> one way we could maybe solve this is to let apps specify which permissions are appropriate in a "read-only" setting, for the specific purpose of the collections app (and similar) being able to restrict read-only viewers of the collection to those permissions on the contained grains

09:03 <kentonv> but it's weird because "read-only" doesn't necessarily make sense for all apps

09:03 <kentonv> efishta, no, if you are creating a collection that you intend to share in a context where you want the contents to be read-only, you can make sure to add each grain with read-only access

09:04 <kentonv> e.g. when you add an etherpad to a collection, you are asked if you want to grant the collection "editor", "commeter", or "viewer" access. That applies to everyone who gets access through the collection.

09:04 <efishta> that makes sense

09:04 <kentonv> the problem is this requires that you decide in advance whether the collection is mean for read-write collaboration or for read-only, and be sure to apply this decision uniformly for all grains you add, which is tedious

09:05 <kentonv> but that's where we are today

09:06 <efishta> I see. I wasn't thinking about the individual setting when you add the grain to a collection. That covers the functionality I thought was lacking when I asked the question initially.

09:06 <efishta> Sure it'd be nice to have it automated, but this works well enough to be useful.

16:25 <networkfail> hi. has anyone here experimented with running nextcloud on sandstorm?

17:28 <mrdomino> kentonv: so, new capnproto release with the openbsd fixes? :-p

17:39 <strugee> hey kentonv, any other former company folks in this channel:

17:40 <strugee> I'm curious how you guys handled copyright assignment internally in the company? i.e. did the company own copyright of code written by employees or did they retain copyright?

17:41 <strugee> if you're free to talk about it obviously :)