Skip to:

Opened 15 years ago

Closed 15 years ago

#1046 closed defect (bug) (no action required)

Need to differentiate the component action "new_wire_post"

Reported by: jeffsayre's profile jeffsayre Owned by: jeffsayre's profile jeffsayre
Milestone: 1.1 Priority: major
Severity: Version:
Component: Keywords:


Currently, the component action "new_wire_post" can be associated with either xprofile or with groups activity. This is not only too generic of a description for the action, but also makes it difficult for my Privacy Component to properly differentiate between xprofile and groups wire post activity items.

My component creates one new table. The table has a component name field. This field is central in helping to differentiate which component objects the user has set to be filtered for privacy. All activity objects have a component name of activity (see screen capture of table schema and sample data).

Unfortunately, with both xprofile and groups writing the same component action for wire post activities, it is impossible to tell whether a privacy record for an activity record that has a component action equal to new_wire_post is intended to be used for xprofile or groups privacy filtering.

I does not make any sense to create an additional field in the privacy table to help differentiate between these two identical terms. There is already a component name field that is properly being used to associate the privacy filter type with the component and its object that needs to be filtered.

So, I propose changing the "new_wire_post" component action for xprofile to "new_profile_wire_post" and the "new_wire_post" component action for groups to "new_group_wire_post".

The patches necessary for this change are included.

Doing so will cause problems with activity stream deletion functions as any data written to the table prior to this change will have the old component action of "new_wire_post" and not the new actions. So, either a function that runs a SQL update will need to be included or the activity deletion functions will have to use an if statement, checking for both the old and the new.

Attachments (5)

jeffsayre_1046_groups_actions.patch (2.0 KB) - added by jeffsayre 15 years ago.
jeffsayre_1046_wire_templatetags_actions.patch (864 bytes) - added by jeffsayre 15 years ago.
jeffsayre_1046_xprofile_actions.patch (3.5 KB) - added by jeffsayre 15 years ago.
jeffsayre_1046_xprofile_notifications_actions.patch (908 bytes) - added by jeffsayre 15 years ago.
BPAz_Table_Issue.jpg (163.0 KB) - added by jeffsayre 15 years ago.
Graphic depicting ambiguous component_action data in BPAz table

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (7)

15 years ago

Graphic depicting ambiguous component_action data in BPAz table

#1 @apeatling
15 years ago

You should be able to differentiate by the component_name.

proflie > new_wire_post
groups > new_wire_post

There should never be a generic "activity" component name.

#2 @apeatling
15 years ago

  • Resolution set to invalid
  • Status changed from new to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.