| View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000856 | v2.4 Release (Closed) | [All Projects] General | public | 2011-07-04 22:00 | 2011-08-16 23:38 | ||||
| Reporter | opto | ||||||||
| Assigned To | caseydk | ||||||||
| Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always | ||||
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||||||
| Product Version | |||||||||
| Target Version | Fixed in Version | 2.4 | |||||||
| Summary | 0000856: edit user preferences returns to sysadmin instead of user admin | ||||||||
| Description | pressing the ok/accept button after eiting some user preferences (e.g. TZ) returns to sysadmin main page. It would be more logical to go to user admin main page to be able to edit more users. | ||||||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||||||
| Attached Files |
| ||||||||
 Relationships |
|
 Relationships |
| Notes |
|
|
caseydk (administrator) 2011-07-14 23:18 |
While I agree that sending you to the System Admin doesn't make sense, I think it'd be better to go back to the just-edited User's info page. If there are more changes to be made, they can be done right there. What do you think? |
|
opto (manager) 2011-07-15 09:10 |
user edit: as admin, I want to go to user list an individual user might want to return? But he could do the changes on that page before the edit? |
|
caseydk (administrator) 2011-07-17 23:37 |
Resolved in r1998; When making the updates just now, I realized that we can't necessarily redirect the user back to the user list because there are three scenarios: - Editing the default user (id=0), so the redirect should go back to the system admin as it was previously; - Editing yourself (which doesn't necessarily mean you're an admin), so the redirect should go back to the user itself; or - Editing a user (which implies you're a user admin), so the redirect could go back to the user list as you wish. For sanity's sake, I've only implemented the first two instead of doing an additional permissions check and doing the third also/instead. That's the most logical in my book.. but it's 2:30am here. ;) |
| Notes |
| Issue History |
|||
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011-07-04 22:00 | opto | New Issue | |
| 2011-07-14 23:14 | caseydk | Project | v2.3 Release (Closed) => v2.4 Release (Closed) |
| 2011-07-14 23:18 | caseydk | Note Added: 0002031 | |
| 2011-07-14 23:18 | caseydk | Status | new => feedback |
| 2011-07-15 09:10 | opto | Note Added: 0002036 | |
| 2011-07-17 23:37 | caseydk | Note Added: 0002046 | |
| 2011-07-17 23:37 | caseydk | Status | feedback => resolved |
| 2011-07-17 23:37 | caseydk | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2011-07-17 23:37 | caseydk | Assigned To | => caseydk |
| 2011-08-16 23:38 | caseydk | Status | resolved => closed |
| 2011-08-16 23:38 | caseydk | Fixed in Version | => 2.4 |
| Issue History |