Team Access Levels

Following the thread with @Randy_Burleson about Access Levels, which access levels would your organisation need to better use DeveloperHub?

At the moment, we have two access levels:-
Owner: Has full access.
Admin: Has full access, minus ability to remove project and remove teammates.

What we have in mind for additional access levels:-
Reviewer: Has read access to all content in project as well as comment access.

How does your organisation move from drafting, to reviewing and publishing?

At Infoworks, we draft the content in Google docs, get it reviewed and then copy the approved content to DevHub.

Suggestions for reviewer role:

  • Developers must be able to review the draft content without having to login to DevHub, because, it will be difficult to give access to 70+ developers.

  • Read-only + Comment access works fine.

  • A tracker option like in Word doc, so that the reviewer knows which is the updated content to be reviewed. Or an option to highlight the modified content also helps.

  • It would be great if the developer can highlight the commented content.

Approver Role: Can we have a role for the final approver, in our case, our VPs.

Welcome @INFOWORKS to our community discussion!

So it sounds like in your case, you need:

  • Reviewer Role: Read-only + Comment access.
  • Approver Role: Read-only + Comment + Publish access (but not write)?

For all the developers to have access, the best way is to have them log in to DeveloperHub using SSO - which we enable for enterprise customers. I’ll reach out to you privately about this to learn more about how you authenticate your users.

Sure. Sounds good.

But a small change:

  • Reviewer Role: Read-only + Comment access.
  • Approver Role: Read-only + Comment + Approve (may be a button)
    If we can have an option like that. If not “reviewer” should be sufficient.

What’s the difference between Approve and Publish button?

Publish will make the doc available for the user.
Approve will send back the doc to the admin for publish.

So basically our developers will review only individual features they worked on. Our VP will review the entire modified content and approve it. And then we (Tech writers) publish it.

Do you think “Approver” should be a privilege that can be given to anyone rather than to have an Approver Role?

For example, an Owner, Writer or Reviewer could approve, provided that they were given the permission to Approve by an Owner or a Writer?

You could then have multiple approvers per project.

Sure Zaid. That works.

User roles feature has been published :raised_hands:

Approval feature is added to the task list.

I am stoked about this! We only needed Owner, Admin, and Reviewer. I could also see us using an Approver role when it becomes available, but I’m blessed with a small enough team of collaborators to be able to elicit approvals in email or Slack.

I encourage the teams with whom I work to content creation initially in Google docs, Confluence, or even email. I shoot for 80% content before cutting across to work in DeveloperHub. Tracking/logging changes is very helpful when collaborating with dissenting content experts.



1 Like

I’d like for Writer role to be able to “Create/delete sections and versions”. We don’t see a lot of value of preventing them from doing so as Publisher+ still has the opportunity to determine if appropriate before publishing

Welcome @Josh_Douglas!

If a writer role can delete sections/versions, then they can completely change the structure of your documentation.

Also, all sections in a published version are by default available for readers. So if they are able to add a section, they can also change what readers see.

The idea here is that writers are unable to modify anything the readers see. Publishers are able to.

Thank you, Zed. I appreciate you sharing the logic behind it. Perhaps a future enhancement can support our use case. While I wouldn’t want a writer to have permission to delete sections or make visible their addition to a section, I would like them to have the ability to create drafts without me having to create the stub for it first. I will have writers from throughout the company willing/able to add valuable documentation as they perform their roles, and requiring them to ask me to develop a stub first will create unnecessary delays. Ideally they would begin drafting immediately while the topic is still fresh on their mind.

An “approval” feature would be a most welcomed addition to the user collaboration ability! I outlined a similar concern in a separate thread which may be incorporated here, if relevant.