-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 132
Conversation
ce84867
to
41ffac9
Compare
…er also provides this information.
41ffac9
to
5f6d8a9
Compare
…rather than operations.
This method was previously handling both user permissions and entity operations but this was confusing and problematic. It is now split into two separate methods with a clear scope: one is handling user permissions and the other handles entity operations.
This is ready but since this is built on top of #671 I will keep this in draft until the other PR is accepted. |
Setting back to draft since this needs more work. I am running tests on my "big" project and there is a regression. We have currently no full support for entity operation permissions on groups, only for the |
Created followup #674 but I had another look and we can still retain the functionality in scope of this, we simply need to check if we are handling a group entity and if this is the case we can translate I propose to handle the test coverage for this in #674. We don't have the coverage right now and this would be out of scope. |
…content. This benefits og_entity_access() which relies on this to work for any entity.
I have added the code which solves the regression and I think this is now complete. I will keep this in draft until I have finished work on #674 - that issue will complete the entity operations for group entities by adding the delete operation. Most importantly it will also add the necessary test coverage which I think is out of scope for this PR. I also want to run the extensive test suite on my work project that has discovered this regression. |
I am near finishing work on #674. Here is the coverage for the regression on This is now ready for review. |
…heir documentation.
@MPParsley Thanks for reviewing! I addressed the remark. I will wait for test results to come back green before merging. I can then "unlock" the next PR. This I can also still as part of this work write the release notes for the next release since this is breaking backwards compatibility. We can still break B/C as long as we're in alpha but I would like to inform our users so that they will know what to expect when updating. |
Thanks for the update! I'm mostly worried about the impact on the ongoing PRs for beta blockers (e.g. #231, #242, #570, ...). |
The impact is due to having split the entity access check into separate checks for user permissions and entity operations. So existing code that is checking entity operations will need to call the other method now. Here is an example how this now looks in my project code: (ref. https://github.com/ec-europa/joinup-dev/pull/2184/files#diff-f26d2164853bef0da7d08750148704f5L86)
Also if people are implementing |
Fixes #672