281845 - Possible to delete users who are initial QA contacts

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Bugzilla :: User Accounts, defect)

Description

[Shane H. W. Travis]

Under Bugzilla 2.16, it was not possible to delete a user who was either an 
Initial QA Contact, or an Initial Owner.

Under 2.18 (as of 2.17.1, actually) this changed to Initial Owner only.

This appears to be an unintentional regression brought on by the landing of bug 
43600; the patch author mistakenly used components.id here instead of 
components.product_id. 

Given that it's been this way for three years now, and nobody else seems to 
have noticed, I'm guessing it hasn't terribly inconvenienced many people... :)

Patch to follow.

Comment 1

[Shane H. W. Travis]

Attachment: Code patch for 2.18 and tip

Should be a pretty trivial review. :)

Comment 2

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

Comment on attachment 173985 [details] [diff] [review]
Code patch for 2.18 and tip

Doh!

Comment 3

[Dave Miller [:justdave]]

For the record, this was caused by the checkin for bug 43600 on 2002 Aug 11.

Comment 4

[Shane H. W. Travis]

2.18:
Checking in editusers.cgi;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/editusers.cgi,v  <--  editusers.cgi
new revision: 1.61.2.6; previous revision: 1.61.2.5
done

Tip:
Checking in editusers.cgi;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/editusers.cgi,v  <--  editusers.cgi
new revision: 1.74; previous revision: 1.73
done

Comment 5

[Stephen Lee]

-            "WHERE products.id = components.id " .
+            "WHERE products.id = components.product_id " .


Hmmm... I can't see any legitimate reason for comparing one ID field with an ID 
field from a different table as was mistakenly done here.

I don't suppose there's any way to make the DB IDs 'type-safe', so that each 
tables's primary key would be a different data type, but keys referencing that 
key would be the same data type? Perhaps this could be configured in a way to 
cause a DB error (or at least warning) from the query leading to this bug.

(obviously this would be a separate RFE if this is remotely feasible)