"invisible" users are creating confusion

[franck-boullier]

The scenario:

This is a feedback from users and how they use Unee-T.

The users:

• User A
  • Role contractor.
  • is a private user
  • Limited privilege: can only see:
  • Public user for the role Management Company
  • Public user for the role Contractor.
• User B, role Management Company is a private user (not visible by User A)
• User C, role Management Company is a private user (not visible by User A but visible by user B)

The Unit:

In that unit:

• There is NO public user in the role Contractor (only private users)
• There are several private users in the role Contractor
• There is 1 public user in the role Management Company
• There are several private users in the role Management Company

The case:

• User B creates a case.
• User B invites User C to the case
• User B invites User A to the case

The problem:

In the current UX in the MEFE User A can only see

• The reporter for the case
• The assignee for the case
• The "Public" users that are invited to the case.

Because of that User A does NOT see that User C has been invited to the case.

This is a problem as User A often wants to make sure the User C is invited to the case BUT, as of today, User A is no way to see that information.

Proposed solution:

Change the way MEFE behaves. User A, as a limited user:

• Should be allowed to see that User C in the list of invited users to this case.
• Should NOT be allowed to un-invite User C from the case.

@nbiton let me know your thoughts on this <--- IMO this is the second step that we need to implement so we can fix the issue reported by Jonathan last week.

[ongdominic]

When user C is invited by user B and user A is not allowed to invite user C, then user A can see user C in the list invited/assigned to the case but not remove user C from the list of invited users or change the assignee for that case.