invite table not created and odd error messages
chrissearle - August 17, 2008 - 08:52
| Project: | LDAP provisioning |
| Version: | 6.x-1.0-alpha2 |
| Component: | Code |
| Category: | bug report |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | miglius |
| Status: | closed |
Jump to:
Description
Just added ldap_prov to a working ldap_integration site
Added a new account (as anonymous) then as admin looked in unverified - it complains that the ldapprov_invite table is missing.
I have _not_ installed the provisioning_invite module - I have no use for it. So the table should not be present - why is it looking for it?
When the user then enters the secure code to verify e-mail then it says four times "Unable to send e-mail". However - the verify e-mail _was_ sent and the auth code _did_ move the user from unverified to pending.
The four errors seem to apply to the "New account requested" email - I get four identical rejection messages in my postmaster mailbox with empty To: fields.
#1
I have separated ldapprov_invite module form the ldapprov module, but looks like some dependency was left. Will fix shortly.
The notification e-mail which gives error is not the one to a newly created (validated) user, but a notification email about new pending account sent to all users with the 'create accounts' permission.
#2
Both bugs should be fixed in the dev (cvs) version.
#3
Will test this evening
Update: couldn't wait - downloaded HEAD, installed and tested - confirmed fix.
This site is going to go live some point this week - I don't mind running dev releases - but I'd prefer a dev release to a CVS checkout - any chance?
#4
I released alpha2 just several days ago, so it might take a week or two until I release a new version. It is not a good policy to release a new version after each bugfix, but the new release will come when I am more confident that the code is more stable. The feedback is welcome.
#5
A dev build with todays date is more than enough :) When I posted #3 the latest dev build was 13th aug - now it says 18th - that will do me just fine (given that this change is in it) :) I certainly don't expect a new non-dev build just for this fix :)
#6
Automatically closed -- issue fixed for two weeks with no activity.