First of all, I completely understand the change to a policy with more paying customers. Although cloud functionality is only a small part of our product, we are happy to pay 25 dollars a month if that means the cloud will be reliable and stable.
I have a question about the custom user roles limit though: why is the limit so low? I can manage to stay within three custom roles, but I really don’t understand the decision of only three custom roles in the first paying plan.
Unless I am missing something here, the custom roles are the only way to handle permissions apart from managing them per-user-per-object. Just having custom roles/groups already is only a basic way of handling this and IMHO the bare essential. Why limit even that?
Are there plans to support more elaborate permission handling, like a rule-based system for example?
About your first question - the change in the amount of custom user roles is a part of new billing policy. In the first paid plan you are able to buy additional roles.
About second question:
Could you please describe a complicated model of usage of roles as you see it. Maybe we will be able to find a solution for that.
We have a very simple database now, which we can barely manage using three custom roles. That was my point, I think any project with multiple types of users needs some user roles and three is very restrictive.
For the rest of the usage criteria we are very comfortably within the usage criteria of Cloud9 (even with the free tier but that wouldn’t last long). But if I need one more user role we have to pay 20 dollar per month extra, for unlimited roles.
Seems a bit unbalanced, that is all.
The way we’d like the developers to look at it is for $45/month you get all the benefits of the Cloud9 plan plus unlimited roles. We’re not talking about a lot of money here… Apple Magic Mouse 2 costs more than that and you have to change batteries every 3 weeks… )))