Custom View Permissions / Custom Sharing Permissions

Ok that’s great, thank you :slight_smile:

I also need to have this information please! Thank you!

Hi! For anyone who’s interested in our Enterprise Edition pricing:

Refer to the SeaTable Prices and click on the “Contact” button below on the page :wink:

I don’t understand why you wouldn’t make the pricing public for everyone to see. I can’t help but feel a bit tricked here. Pulling potential customers into the product, then stripping of essential features and hide them behind an invisible pay wall when the customer is already deeply invested does have a bit of a sour taste tbh. I understand that you need to pay developers and ofc they should be paid fairly. Willing to pay a fair price and knowing the pricing structure now, I have to say that it would have been good to know from the beginning that sharing permissions would become a payed feature and what would be the costs for it so we could have made an educated decision about SeaTable upfront. Now in the middle of some projects we are kinda caged between existing bugs and missing features or an upgrade that we cannot afford because of a custom sharing permissions that you made us believe were part of the Developer Edition to begin with.

And last but not least, my personal opinion about the Enterprise Edition (self hosted) pricing structure. I seriously think you should make the pricing dependent on company size (internal user) and not the number of potential external users. It’s just not realistic for a let’s say 3-4 people operation to pay ten-thousands of dollars annually for a database solution depending on their customer’s needs to give visibility to a huge amount of their employees. It’s something that is neither predictable nor controllable on our side (or probably any other of your customers that is).

I like what you are doing with the product and your team seems very motivated and responsive to user feedback but as with so many software solutions theses days the pricing conception ignores reality beyond a corporate customer base. I don’t want to go into detail about my dislike of user/month subscription models in general here.

1 Like

The first version of self-hosted enterprise edition is only available a few days ago. So the price is not available yet.

For custom sharing permission, it was included in version 1.5 developer edition a month ago because a mistake in our packaging system. Actually we are not stripping features.

If such a feature is essential to your project and you have a special case that can’t afford per user price, you can surely discuss with us via emails.

Hi Pueblo, I appreciate your frankness and your criticism. I hear you.
Let me say this as a bit of background: Custom Sharing Permissions were introduced in version 1.5. They were never meant to become part of the Free plan. They were always meant to be exclusive to the paid plans (Plus and Enterprise) and SeaTable Enterprise for self-hosting. We corrected this mistake in the following release 1.6.
Talking about SeaTable EE: We are not trying to keep users in the dark about its price. We just haven’t gotten down to publish them on the website. Please bear with us.
I understand that the removal of custom sharing permissions has put you in an awkward position. You started using them all the while expecting them to remain a feature of the Developer Edition. We are sorry for that.
Echoing Daniel: Please send me a personal message and I am sure we can find a way that is acceptable for both of us.

Hi, we were testing the free hosted and docker version since version 1.5, seatable was very close to what we need for our project.
As with 1.6 on the for us essential Custom Sharing permission option has been removed we are forced to stop this project as we need an internal and client view for tables.
The Enterprise or payed Version would be a target for us after an real longterm usage and real life testing, we are forced to change our direction and are Sorry about that…

Hi mtmail, do you know external links in SeaTable? You can use these sharing links to share data in read-only mode with your clients. The external link feature is (and remains) part of Developer Edition.
Apart from that: You can send me a personal message and let’s talk.

Hi Ralf, thank you very much for your fast response and offer to find a solution, nice turn, I will contact you soon…
E-Mail sent a minute ago, Greetings

A short Update, external links are no solution as they are related to an table including all table views, it is not possible if there is a internal view showing all columns and a view for clients which shall show specific columns only, everyone having the externl link will see all columns and all views, custom view permissions was the only working solution to achive that and collaborate with clients…

In the meanwhile we have upgraded to v1.6 DE (self-hosted). Now also the ‘share to user’ and ‘share to group’ features are not working anymore. I was under the impression that those were not part of advanced permissions by your posts earlier in this conversation!?

Maybe this is a bug?

See Screenshots:

The share to user and share to group function are not part of the advanced permissions.

If this does not work, this is a bug. We don’t have other reports about this being a problem. So I speculate it’s a problem with your instance. Maybe as simple as a caching problem?

I tried different browsers and emptied all caches. Still showing just blank white for those two menu options. How would I troubleshoot this further?

This is strange. @daniel.pan would you pls take a look?

Do you have this problem for a newly created base?

Yes, I had the same thought (that it might not work only with ‘old’ bases) and created a new one to test. Same problem though!

Can you use Chrome debug mode to check if which request return an error?

@pueblo, Tom here. I have exactly the same issue, also with version 1.6.0 (and other versions).

Are you using an Ad-Blocker by chance? Maybe uBlock Origin or a similar one with “Cosmetic Filtering”?

Maybe then there is a solution. I’m a user of uBlock origin and I had cosmetic filtering activated even when I allowed the server in uBlock Origin / uMatrix, the cosmetic filtering was doing this.

This was transparent to me as it does not provoke any messages in the console.

Turning the cosmetic filtering off solved the problem immediately.

Screenshot: uBlock Origin - Cosmetic Filtering disabled

uBlock Origin - Cosmetic Filtering disabled

Likely the culprit is the class-name share-link-container.

Hey Tom. Yes, it was a content blocker. It was solved via PM, that’s why the solution is not listed here.

1 Like