@Emyrk is the auditor role even used? Seems like we could just remove it.

@kylecarbs It was added because the UI actually added the "audit" page which can only be seen in developer mode. The page is hidden when the static files are compiled. So the auditor role is hooked up to the UI, but the backend feature is sparse atm (table exists, but that is it atm).

What I can do is just say the "user admin" has auditing permissions and delete the auditor role? I want to keep 1 role with that permission so that the FE team has a role they can use for testing that UI feature that is already implemented.

The owner role has audit permissions, but the admin does not. Is it something we want to add?

@Emyrk I updated the title of this. I assume it's trivial to do... thoughts?

@kylecarbs the auditor role actually has a function now as we have audit logs.

What do we want to do? Hide the role if the licensed feature is not activated?

I think that would make sense

Interesting 🤔. Might want to mark some roles as "enterprise" or something. But show them if the user has the role, even if the license is not enterprise.

This issue is becoming stale. In order to keep the tracker readable and actionable, I'm going close to this issue in 7 days if there isn't more activity.

Probably worth keeping this issue open.

The BE returns assignable roles here:

and for orgs:

We need to remove AGPL roles from this is they are not enabled in the license. But if a user has the role, and no longer has the license, that role should still appear on the user in question.

@Emyrk should we close this out? It seems relatively low prio.

I would love to close this out until someone is very adamant they need this 😄.

This gets complicated in edge cases if someone downgrades from enterprise to APGL for example.

Closing unless requested again in the future.