CHANGELOG: June 3 / Share Documents and Entities, Performance improvements, bug fixes

Share Documents and Entities

Finally, you can share documents and entities with people outside Fibery. Just find Share icon in the top right corner.

Here is an example of a shared document

2021-06-03 16.13.00

NOTES:

  • When you share a document, all mentioned entities are shared as well.
  • When you share an entity all collections are accessible as well. For example, if you share a Feature with a list of Tasks inside, these Tasks will be accessible.
  • All back-references are shared as well.

:muscle: Improvements

  • Entity View performance improvements. In many cases, Entity View was quite slow, especially when there are many selects and relations. We’ve optimized load time and now it should work much faster.
  • Zendesk sync: Support custom ticket fields
  • Discourse sync: Vote field support
  • Enable/Disable Action Buttons

:shrimp: Fixed bugs

  • It’s impossible to upload more than 2000 rows via CSV import
  • Error when importing a New Type with workflow
  • State/Single/Multi-select axis ignores User custom Order
3 Likes

Yay, sharing! I’m already making use of it. :slight_smile:

It would be nice to be able to specify the default view width someone will see though. I know they can control it themselves, but most people I’m sharing with won’t be familiar with Fibery and probably won’t know to click that button.

View sharing

I can’t recall seeing any comments on view sharing. Is that in progress or something that has been pushed out in the meantime? Sharing views and/or read-only users is the thing we are planning to leverage.

Sharing Depth

One thing I noticed for the current implementation is that we might mention an entity in an entity rich text field. So, if you share that view, the person can open that mentioned entity as you show in the demo. However, I noticed that when you expand that entity that was mentioned, that entity might have related entities or backlinks available within it. Right now even the name of those entities are redacted, which can limit the ability to understand it in some cases. I do think it would be useful to control that a bit more so that at the very least you could expose the name of those entities with or without providing access to them.

In other words, we share a document/entity as the first level. Anything mentioned can be seen and opened by the people viewing the shared doc/entity, which is the second level. So, once you are at the second level, i think a key decision is how you handle the 3rd level of references/relations. Currently you can’t view the name and can’t access them. I think it might be common that people are ok with sharing the name of the entities at that 3rd level, but don’t want to allow access to them. I get that the current approach is more conservative as a good starting point, but wanted to share the feedback.

Sharing and Navigation

One additional thing I have kind of expected as sharing has been more of an active topic, is that the more you utilize sharing, the more you need to try to provide navigation within the doc or entity instead of relying on the left nav, smart folders, etc. This is something we are going to just have to keep in mind.

3 Likes

Thank you for the feedback!

Read-only users are planned for the nearest future as a part of better permissions management.

I agree that sharing should be more customizable, for example:

  • Allow comments
  • Control what is shared (hide some collections for example)
  • Control depth of sharing

Navigation is another complex and interesting topic, but so far we didn’t have any feedback or people desires here.

2 Likes

I wanted to check back in specifically on View sharing. The primary outcome I was hoping for as part of the sharing work was the ability to share a roadmap, which I maintain in a Board view. Is view sharing still going to happen?

It is not in immediate plans, but we are discussing what to focus on this week, so I hope we’ll share our thoughts and plans soon.