Hi,

I was wondering how to set up a view to show users with certain pattern in username.

I wanted to look for users who have used their email addresses as their username and wanted to add a filter that shows any username with the @ character in it.

How is this done?

thanks in advance for any info on this.

CommentFileSizeAuthor
#6 views-660140.patch774 bytesdagmar
#4 filter_user_name.png13.99 KBh3000

Comments

tanveer_2030’s picture

tanveer_2030 commented

Hi,

You mean you want to show logged user name on site?

tanveer_2030’s picture

tanveer_2030 commented

Hi,

If you want to show logged user name then you can use this variable to get logged user name.

echo $user->name;

Let me know if you will feel some problem with this.

Best Regards,
Tanveer Hussain

dagmar’s picture

dagmar
Primary language Spanish
Location Argentina
commented
Status: Active » Fixed

You can apply a filter in the view:

Filter: User name.
Operator: Contains
Value: '@'

h3000’s picture

h3000 commented
StatusFileSize
new filter_user_name.png13.99 KB

@dagmar - I have tried that but I don't see the Contains operator - how do I make it appear?

Attached is a screenshot of the User name filter.

dagmar’s picture

dagmar
Primary language Spanish
Location Argentina
commented
Status: Fixed » Active

Sorry, my mistake.

dagmar’s picture

dagmar
Primary language Spanish
Location Argentina
commented
Title: How to show users with a certain pattern in username » Filter users with a certain pattern in username
Version: 6.x-2.8 » 6.x-3.x-dev
Component: Miscellaneous » user data
Category: support » feature
Status: Active » Needs review
StatusFileSize
new views-660140.patch774 bytes

Here is a patch.

h3000’s picture

h3000 commented

ok - works - thanks!

dawehner’s picture

dawehner
Primary language German
commented
Status: Needs review » Reviewed & tested by the community

Patch works fine

merlinofchaos’s picture

merlinofchaos commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Fixed

Committed to 3.x in both d6 and d7.

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

nigelcunningham’s picture

nigelcunningham commented
Version: 6.x-3.x-dev » 6.x-2.x-dev
Status: Closed (fixed) » Active

Could this also be applied to the 6.x-2.x line, please? I've manually done so, and it works fine.

Nigel

dawehner’s picture

dawehner
Primary language German
commented
Status: Active » Reviewed & tested by the community

.

merlinofchaos’s picture

merlinofchaos commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Fixed

Ok, committed.

nigelcunningham’s picture

nigelcunningham commented

Thanks!

Status: Fixed » Closed (fixed)

Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

sukameister’s picture

sukameister commented

When are we going to see this fix available in the 6.x-2.x line? The latest in that line is from June 16, before this fix was generated, and the current 2.x version still contains this issue.

paolomainardi’s picture

paolomainardi commented

Subscribe, is the issue fixed also for 2.x version ?

Thanks a lot.

[EDIT] I confirm that the feature is available on 6.x-dev branch.

Gabriel R.’s picture

Gabriel R. commented

The fix at #6 from Dagmar does not work with 6.2.x
Please advise.

nigelcunningham’s picture

nigelcunningham commented
Status: Closed (fixed) » Reviewed & tested by the community

I've been slow to look at the newest version, but have just gotten around to that. Despite the posts above, it doesn't seem to be applied in 6.x-2.12.

dawehner’s picture

dawehner
Primary language German
commented
Status: Reviewed & tested by the community » Closed (fixed)

Why should we write release announcement when noone reads them :)

6.x-2.12 is a security only release. The changes are in 6.x-2.x-dev.

nigelcunningham’s picture

nigelcunningham commented

But there is no 6.x-2.x-dev any more, and 6.x-2.12 was released in December, nearly six months after comment 13. It's not that unreasonable to think that it might be in 2.12 :).

That said, yes - I didn't read the release notes for 2.12 when submitting the bug (though I would have at the time).

Could we please have a 2.x dev line back?

Regards,

Nigel

merlinofchaos’s picture

merlinofchaos commented

6.x-2.x-dev is http://drupal.org/node/95897 -- it's not gone, just not listed on the project page.

nigelcunningham’s picture

nigelcunningham commented

Thanks.