Users and admins can delete accounts / entreprises / customers / order cycles / groups

What is the need / problem

  • Jane/Mary/Shannon/Fred needs to be able to delete their account from OFN
    '> not possible today to delete a user account when he has started to use OFN
  • Mary/Shannon/Fred needs to be able to delete an entreprise they own and don’t use anymore
    '> not possible today as soon as any product/order cycle/order is linked to this entreprise
  • Mary/Shannon needs to be able to cancel access to their private shop to some customers
    '> cannot delete a customer from their customer list
  • Mary/Shannon needs to be able to clean up their order cycle page to see only what is relevant to them
    '> cannot delete/archive an order cycle if orders attached
  • Mary/Shannon/Fred can delete a group they own
    '> cannot delete/archive a group
  • Manel needs to be able to do all that for Shannon/Mary/Fred/Jane

Who does it impact

All users.

What is the current impact of this problem

  • Legal compliance: With the EU regulation on data, OFN is supposed to give the tools for a hub to delete the customers data upon request or if the legal duration for data conservation has expired.
  • Annoying user experience: Jane is not happy because she cannot delete her account if she wants. Mary, Shannon and Fred are not happy because they are polluted with lots of information they don’t need anymore.
  • Private shop are non-functional: There is no way today to remove a customer who previously had access to a private shop, so the hub manager is not able to manage the access to their private shop.

What is the benefit in focusing on this

  • Improved user experience = happy users
  • Private shops will be managable
  • Hubs and instance managers will be able to be legal compliant

Links to more details

Potential solutions that will solve this problem

  • Enable “archive” for users, entreprises, order cycle, etc.

I just want to affirm that this is an important issue in Canada. Right now, we have only the production space - and no testing space. So any new user plays around and creates all kinds of fake enterprises. We need a way to manage these - either hide them or delete them or something. In addition, when I follow up with a new user, and they tell me they have decided not to proceed with using OFN, they always ask me to delete their enterprises and their account. I have to tell them I can’t do that. VERY bad reputation for OFN.
What do we need to do to move this out of draft and into ‘review ready’?? @MyriamBoure @Kirsten @NickWeir - any of you see this as important?

We are all in the same case @tschumilas as staging servers are not really us for live tests from users, but more by developers to stage issues to test, etc. If a user do some tests and doesn’t want to proceed you can always ask a dev to delete all their associated data direcly in the database. This is not ideal but we CAN still do it if you have an explicit request from a user. But I agree that it is annoying a pretty large number of users. It’s not a trivial task though, we have to see how we want to prioritize that, after Spree is done, between all the urgent and priority things we want to do.

1 Like

@danielle question on process here, shall I open a specific icebox for one single of the needs listed above? I think they are all connected so IMO it should be a single epic to implement the logic and then check the archive or deletion ux on each page. But we can also start with only one of those, and then implement the other ones step by step, one by one. It definitely need some more specific speccing and brainstorming but this can be done after the need has been prioritized. So is the need clear enough? I put it to review ready as it seems important for Canada as well, so seems good to see how to move forward on priorization process. So you can give feedback and I can improve the icebox depending on feedback.

I think handling deletions as a single thing is fine. It makes sense.

I see this as different to things like integration. This is a common need, but happens in different areas. Integration is a method to achieve meeting a need, and there are multiple needs we could meet via integrating with other software. See the difference?

Ok so I guess this is ready to be approved then! @Kirsten @Rachel @danielle @tschumilas @NickWeir and all basically is the need clear enough and this issue can be moved to “voting”?

I’m just noting that this issue has the most votes. Still a priority?