Revolution: Simplify the “User Groups” section: display groups as a grid, not a tree

[Ruslan-Aleev]

Feature request

Summary

In the current version, it’s almost impossible to understand where to edit a specific “User Group”, because the editing link is hidden in the context menu.
And when you click on a group, it’s not the group’s settings appearing (what you expect), but adding a user to the group.

I suggest making the display of "User Group" in the form of a grid instead of a tree. And the user can be added to the group inside the group editing (this already works, see gif above).
This will be much clearer, especially with the new link on name and gear context menu.

It will look something like this:

It will be possible to display useful information in the "User Group" grid, such as users in a group, access to sections (contexts, groups, etc.)

Why is it needed?

Simplification in UI / UX

Related issue(s)/PR(s)

N/A

[sergant210]

In addition

1. Rename the "User groups & users" tab to "User groups".
2. Simplify the copy logic of Access Policies .

[SnowCreative]

I agree that it's confusing that way it's set up now.

[sebastian-marinescu]

A "Update User group" or "Update group settings" button above the already loaded grid would also make it much clearer.

[Ruslan-Aleev]

A "Update User group" or "Update group settings" button above the already loaded grid would also make it much clearer.

I do not quite understand.
Now all actions are located in the gear menu on the right, so an additional button is not needed.

[sebastian-marinescu]

Your suggestion and UI proposal look very good, assuming someone would provide a PR for that.
I'm just saying that it might also be possible to add another button, like this:

[Ruslan-Aleev]

Now it's clearer :) Yes, we can do this, and it's easier.
But personally, I am in favor of rewriting the section completely.
p.s. Probably for branch 2.8 the button solution would be appropriate.

[JoshuaLuckers]

I'm ok with having a button in 3.0 as well. A rewrite would be nice but it's something that can go into 3.1 as well.

[Ruslan-Aleev]

I was also always confused by the name User Groups, isn't it more logical to call it Access Groups?

[sottwell]

Not necessarily; there are User Groups and Resource Groups. Access Groups could easily get confused for either of those.

[Bruno17]

I was also always confused by the name User Groups, isn't it more logical to call it Access Groups?

Sometimes we group Users for other reasons than access. So User Groups is more logical for me.

[Mark-H]

The button has been added in 2.8 but I'll leave the issue open if people want to discuss further how users & user groups is currently set up with the tree.

[Ibochkarev]

Improved in #15270

@modxbot close

[Ibochkarev]

@modxbot open

[Ruslan-Aleev]

In the future, it makes sense to remove other trees as well, if possible. Trees (other than resources and menus) are controversial UX choices, see https://github.com/modxcms/revolution/issues/10518, https://github.com/modxcms/revolution/pull/15478