Do filters already have access to the user context? My first thought is that this would allow such a filter function to be written (one that works for all users, but filters based on user).
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 08:33, Dale Harvey <d...@arandomurl.com> wrote: > On 13 March 2012 15:30, Dale Harvey <d...@arandomurl.com> wrote: > > > So I was trying to implement the ability for logged in users to subscribe > > to the changes feed for updates to their own documents (its currently > admin > > only), its a simple patch but its not very clean (mostly because the we > > dont want to have the changes feed read the full document) > > > > A way that I could implement it, that seems a lot more globally > applicable > > and applies cleaner, is to allow the ddoc author to enforce filters to > > happen on non admin access to _changes and replication (on any database) > > > > This should negatively affect anything else, filters are already used and > > supported in both places, I have also seen it asked for regularly in the > > context of replication, ddoc authors could specify exactly what users are > > allowed to replicate, the enforced filter would override any users filter > > > > > Obviously I meant "should not negatively affect" :) > > > > As far as I can tell the only problem would be how to have the author > > specify the enforcement, apart from that it should apply cleanly, > > introduces a fairly large amount of new functionality and adds very > little > > overhead > > > > Ideas? > > > > Jan mentioned this could be used more widely for updates / shows / lists, > > that is starting to sound more complicated and does start introducing > > problems, I would prefer to look at the simple case of filters for > changes > > / replication for now, but if there was an even more global solution that > > applied cleanly, I would be happy to > > > > > > >
