Kanban and process flows vs field permissions


Usually, in a process flow, each user will be responsible for editing some fields, but not others. And if there is a flow, there is an order to follow.


User 1 must fill the first 4 fields of a form.

When those 4 fields are filled, flow goes to stage 2, where user 1 can still see stuff but can´t edit fields anymore. The next 2 fields of the form are only editable by User 2 (who can see but not edit the fields filled by user 1)

And so on and so forth. But I have no idea how can I do that. I can set user permissions for the entire table. How to set for specific fields?

Also, I am not sure how to change the status of a flow based on completion of 2 different fields.

I thought of creating a calculated field where IF field 1 was not empty AND field 2 was not empty, then TRUE.

So I would create a trick that when calculated field became TRUE, then it would change the flow stage.

Hey @RogerPenna

For this kind of permissioning you would need a little bit of low-code! It’s quite simple, but at the moment you can’t do this profile customization with no-code!

What do you think schedule a meeting with our team for us to understand better everything that you need and guide you through this customization?

ps: I have read this page

But although the page above tells that basically I can do everything I asked in the question above, it doesn´t say how (just that I can), and tells me to check the documentation. However, I found nothing about that in the documentation.

edit: ok, it seems this kind of advanced permissioning is only possible in the developers area, low code, right?

Yeah, that kind of complex permissioning at the moment you can only do it by using low-code! Here’s our documentation about complex access levels: Profiles and Access Levels

Ou team can guide you through it, if you’re interested, we can schedule a meeting :slight_smile:

1 Like

As I don´t think there is an AND function at formulas, I found another way that requires more fields. Each with a piece of the formula.

One calculated field to check each field that must be completed. IF “field1”<>" ", then 1, otherwise 0.

So each field completed results in another field with the number 1. Then you have a SUM field that will sum all fields that must be completed.

So you have 3 fields that must be completed to go to next status/flow task.

When you complete all 3, the sum in the 4th field will be 3. And then a trick… if Calculated Field = “3”, then change Status.

Interesting solution!

Another simpler one is using the checklist field: Checklist so when the checklist is completed(100%), then the record will be moved to the next stage! or instead of the action move to next stage you can use th update a record to update the status field

Yes, I thought of using the Checklist 100%.

However, the checklist itself is not really connected to the fields. If I want fields to be completed in the form, having the user to “check” the Checklist sounds like duplicate work. “Here, complete the field and below you confirm you completed the field above”. The checklist sounds more useful or reasonable to be used with “manual” tasks (Tasks done outside Jestor)


I am also interested in the solution for this problem.

@marcos.figueiredo Although I am a bit familiar with low-code permissioning, I don’t see how it will work on this case. As I understand it allows for selecting specific fields for being read-only or hidden for specific profiles, which is static for each profile. This case is different, as we need permissions to change dynamically as the process flows.

We need fields that can be edited to became read-only when the process changes hands. User 1 cannot edit field that were previously editable just by a change in the process stage.

It does not work to create an app that only user 1 have access and filter to show only process in his editable stage. To edit the field at some point, they’ll need edit permission to the table and would be able to take a shortcut and open the table directly to edit any fields not restricted to their user.

In my case, I need a budget to be created by an user but does not allow the same user to change it after approval. Approval is a change in stage of the process when a specific user click on an “Approve” button, part of the same table. The solution I found was to create a separate table just for approved budgets and an automation that creates a record in this table every time a budged is approved in the original budget table. The approved budget table is read only for the users who create the budgets. In practice it worked, but I’m not happy with the solution as I lost the possibility to use the kanban functionality as now I have to work with two budget tables.

Any help?

I have other processes to migrate to Jeito but I’d like to use a simpler solution to create them and avoid using lots of “supporting” tables.

Many thanks!

Hey @Fernando_L

Assuming that you have access to the low-code area.

It has two things:

  1. You can create low-code locks using Jestor.error. so, for example, when a record has a status = approved, if you try to add some value to the budget, an error message will appear.
  2. It’s on out roadmap an upgrade to the conditional field besides hide, show, make required and make optional, also have make read-only too. But there is no due date yet.

Here’s our documentation to guide you: Métodos Nativos

Hello @marcos.figueiredo , thanks a lot!
I haven’t been that far into the low-code area, having done some work only in profile permissions.
Do you mind showing in the simplest possible case the use of the “Jestor.error” so I can see how it is done and work on using it on my case? Just a simple table with maybe one text field and one phase field and the text field becoming read-only when the phase field is set to some specific status.
Does it require to create a custom automation or is it a modification on the table (or specific field) code?
It would be very helpful.
Thanks again!

Hello Marcos,
Any updates on the possibility to use conditional field to make fields read-only? It would for sure be very useful.

Hi @Fernando_L

Not yet, but you can submit this as a suggestion in the “ask for a feature” category

Thanks, I’ll do that!