Closed Bug 277389 Opened 20 years ago Closed 20 years ago

Flag notification code should NOT append emailsuffix to cc list's addresses

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Email Notifications, defect)

2.19.1
defect
Not set
minor

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 2.18

People

(Reporter: Wurblzap, Assigned: Wurblzap)

Details

(Keywords: regression)

Attachments

(1 file, 3 obsolete files)

As stated in http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/tip/html/flags-overview.html#flags-create-field-cclist, a flag's cc list contains full e-mail addresses as opposed to Bugzilla logins. I was not aware of that, so my patch on bug 256762 is wrong. It appends the e-mail suffix to the cc lists' addresses (and not even in all cases as Peter pointed out in bug 256762, comment 12) but needs to leave it alone instead.
Attached patch Patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #170535 - Flags: review?
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Flags: blocking2.20?
Flags: blocking2.18?
Attachment #170535 - Flags: review?
Attachment #170535 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #170537 - Flags: review?(kiko)
Comment on attachment 170537 [details] [diff] [review] Adding a comment to the flag admin page, too >--- head/template/en/default/admin/flag-type/edit.html.tmpl 2004-12-19 21:53:26.000000000 +0100 >+++ patched/template/en/default/admin/flag-type/edit.html.tmpl 2005-01-07 12:26:14.000000000 +0100 >@@ -163,7 +163,13 @@ > <tr> > <th>CC List:</th> > <td> >- if requestable, who should get carbon copied on email notification of requests<br> >+ if requestable, who should get carbon copied on email notification of requests; >+ this is a comma-separated list of full e-mail addresses which do not >+ need to be Bugzilla logins >+ [% IF Param('emailsuffix') %], >+ so please make sure to append your emailsuffix >+ <kbd>[% Param('emailsuffix') %]</kbd> on each >+ [% END %].<br> I'd make this a separate sentence: Note that the configured emailsuffix 'mozilla.org' will *not* be appended to these addresses, and you should add it explicitly if so desired. r=kiko with that.
Attachment #170537 - Flags: review?(kiko) → review+
Attached patch Patch 1.2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Addressing comments.
Attachment #170537 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #170541 - Flags: review+
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval2.18?
Whiteboard: patch awaiting approval
Attached patch Patch 1.3Splinter Review
Uploaded the wrong file (an older one). Sorry.
Attachment #170541 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #170543 - Flags: review+
Flags: blocking2.20?
Flags: blocking2.20+
Flags: blocking2.18?
Flags: blocking2.18+
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval2.18?
Flags: approval2.18+
Flags: approval+
Whiteboard: patch awaiting approval → patch awaiting checkin
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.18
Checking in Bugzilla/Flag.pm; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/Flag.pm,v <-- Flag.pm new revision: 1.27; previous revision: 1.26 done Checking in template/en/default/admin/flag-type/edit.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/admin/flag-type/edit.html.tmpl,v <-- edit.html.tmpl new revision: 1.10; previous revision: 1.9 done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 20 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Checking in Bugzilla/Flag.pm; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/Bugzilla/Flag.pm,v <-- Flag.pm new revision: 1.18.2.6; previous revision: 1.18.2.5 done Checking in template/en/default/admin/flag-type/edit.html.tmpl; /cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/admin/flag-type/edit.html.tmpl,v <-- edit.html.tmpl new revision: 1.6.2.3; previous revision: 1.6.2.2 done
Whiteboard: patch awaiting checkin
Ok, new problem: <bright red> The e-mail address you entered (email@host.com) didn't pass our syntax checking for a legal email address. Enter only the username (the @host.com will be appended). It must also not contain any of these special characters: \ ( ) & < > , ; : " [ ], or any whitespace. </bright red> in editflagtypes.cgi, sub validateCCList, there's the line: foreach my $address (@addresses) { CheckEmailSyntax($address) } This of course checks it against the parameter "emailregexp" If we allow arbitrary CC lists for Flags (why *do* we do that for flags but not for normal CC lists?) then we will need a seperate way to validate the CC e-mail addresses.
(In reply to comment #8) Whoa... You're right. Please do file a new bug on this.
Blocks: 278414
No longer blocks: 278414
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: