Sandboxing

Is this a feature that people still want? As noted in the thread:
[bandtoband.com] https://bandtoband.com/forums/feature-request/wiki-artist-missing-in-sea-50737

it tends to mess things up. Sandboxing's idea was to hide a work in progress completely, but that can cause serious issues with the Live Link feature, search results (which I try to screen out), etc.

Our good friend Matt Westwood was the biggest advocate for sandboxing back in the day, but his presence is not abundant any more (a sad reality). If no one needs the feature, I can remove it completely and all weird issues would immediately go away.


Kevin

Hiding things just caused confusion more than anything. Especially when the user who'd hidden them disappeared, but we could sort of figure out that the entries were there. I'd prefer if you removed it completely.

Some alternatives that may be useful if possible:
- An option to Q your own entry (could be handy if you're deliberately leaving something incomplete for the time being)
- An admin page showing orphaned entries (they were auto sandboxed on the old site, and it was nice to be able to browse the entries when you felt like trying to de-orphan something)

I agree sandboxing isn't necessary, and I like Bloopy's suggestions.

I can easily allow users to question their own entries if one wants to flag the entry as less-than ready for review.

When you are referring to orphans, what do you mean exactly? Internally to the code base I use the term "orphan" to refer to an album that has no attachment to the network. It's "orphaned" because it's unconnected.

Are you referring to an orphan as one whose owner is no longer working on it?


Kevin

No, by orphans I also mean albums that have no attachment to the network. An admin page to see a listing of these would be interesting and useful.

Understood, thanks for the clarification. I'll add it to my ToDo list and see what I can come up with.


Kevin