#10271 closed defect (duplicate)
set_owner not considering extra permissions
Reported by: | Owned by: | ||
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | ticket system | Version: | 0.12dev |
Severity: | major | Keywords: | set_owner extra permission workflow restrict_owner |
Cc: | Branch: | ||
Release Notes: | |||
API Changes: | |||
Internal Changes: |
Description
We created a custom Workflow according to Workflow documentation and assigned dedicated permissions using the optional tracopt.perm.config_perm_provider.ExtraPermissionsProvider which works fine in principle. The issue reported here is the fact that using .set_owner operation does not consider those users having assigned permissions via tracopt.perm.config_perm_provider.ExtraPermissionsProvider but only those having MODIFY_TICKET.
OS: CentOS 5.5 Python: 2.4
Attachments (0)
Change History (3)
comment:1 by , 12 years ago
Milestone: | → undecided |
---|
comment:2 by , 11 years ago
Keywords: | workflow restrict_owner added |
---|---|
Resolution: | → duplicate |
Status: | new → closed |
To summarize, action.permissions
specifies permissions that users must have to carry out the action and action.set_owner
specifies a list of users that can be set as the ticket owner. The latter overrides the [ticket] restrict_owner
setting. Conversely, when [ticket] restrict_owner = true
and action.set_owner
hasn't been specified, the select contains all users with a valid sessions that posses TICKET_MODIFY
. It sounds like you would like to specify the permission that determines which users populate the list. For example, you might like to specify TICKER_OWNER
as the permission that determines whether a user can own the ticket, and thus determines which usernames will populate the list.
If my interpretation of your request is correct, it is a duplicate of #3580.
comment:3 by , 11 years ago
Milestone: | undecided |
---|
All the tickets for {20} from last year have probably been seen multiple times by now, yet are still to be triaged…