We are asking folks to help us conduct a simple usability test on our community infrastructure:
How to help:
If you have not had the opportunity to evaluable a working copy of Backdrop CMS in the last 12 months:
- DO NOT read the comments here until you finished the test.
- Attempt to accomplish the following scenario
- Post a comment below with feedback about how easy or difficult it was to accomplish this task and any ideas you have for making it easier.
Scenario:
You would like access to a sandbox site to evaluate Backdrop CMS to see what features it comes with 'out of the box" without having to install it yourself.
Recent comments
We now have a working version of Organic Groups. https://backdropcms.org/project/og
organic groups or "group module"?
@argiepiano I was referring to the main goal of restricting access to a content type. I was thinking that if the solution is to write a custom module there's a more direct way to implement access...
Disable hidden path message on particular content type
To add to @argiepiano's point; I've been following the discussion in #5634 on possible/probable performance impacts of content access modules : https://github.com/backdrop/backdrop-issues/issues/...
Disable hidden path message on particular content type
Seems to be an awkward ways to avoid using a content access module :). I don't follow. This doesn't in any way restrict or grant access. It simply removes an info message.
Disable hidden path message on particular content type
Seems to be an awkward ways to avoid using a content access module :).
Disable hidden path message on particular content type