[turba] Turba 2.3 without shares and more than one address book

[MailingListe]

Zitat von Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>:

> Zitat von MailingListe <lst_hoe02 at kwsoft.de>:
>
>> Zitat von Jan Schneider <jan at horde.org>:
>>
>>> Zitat von MailingListe <lst_hoe02 at kwsoft.de>:
>>>
>>>> Zitat von MailingListe <lst_hoe02 at kwsoft.de>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello
>>>>>
>>>>> we are in progress of update Turba 2.0.5 to 2.3. All the tables  
>>>>> have been extended to the new schema and it basically works.  
>>>>> What we have trouble with is the following
>>>>>
>>>>> We have more then one source with different tables and must  
>>>>> stick with it because some other application using the same  
>>>>> database has no idea about the e-mail users.
>>>>> Therefore i have set all sources to "use_shares=false" and set  
>>>>> permissions with the "admin" user for all sources. This does not  
>>>>> work (no listing possible) as long as i don't comment out  
>>>>> "owner_id" for the sources in question.
>>>>> If i comment out the owner_id unfortunately no owner at all is  
>>>>> set when adding new contacts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this expected behaviour or have i done something wrong?
>>>>
>>>> I hate to speak with myself but beside some out-of-office replies  
>>>> i get no answer so maybe the problem was not clear.
>>>>
>>>> We have Horde 3.3, IMP 4.3, Ingo 1.2.1 and now want to use Turba  
>>>> 2.3 instead of 2.0.5. We must use 3 tables for our address books  
>>>> as some other application using the addresses demand different  
>>>> tables for access rights.
>>>> To not mix up anything we want to start with "use_shares=false"  
>>>> for all sources and set the permissions in the Horde permissions  
>>>> interface as the attributes "public" are gone in the new version.  
>>>> With this normal users can not list anything out of the address  
>>>> books as long as they are not the owner of the address entry or  
>>>> the "owner" attribute is commented out for the source in question.
>>>>
>>>> Is this a bug or a feature?
>>>>
>>>> If i comment out the "owner_id" the users can list & search the  
>>>> address book, but no owner is set if i add an entry.
>>>>
>>>> Again bug or feature?
>>>
>>> Feature, if I understood your setup correctly.
>>>
>>> Jan.
>>
>> For the second one i tend to agree because if i comment out a field  
>> in the sources normally i don't want it at all. The first problem  
>> seams odd because if i don't want to use "shares" it makes no sense  
>> to check the owner additionally to the permissions set in horde or  
>> have i missed something?
>> Is this technical reasoned or is it needed for some other feature?
>
> Well, it's been this way for 8 years now, and no one complained so  
> far, so I guess there is a good reason to leave it this way.
>

This must be a misunderstanding : The Turba shares concept is as far  
as i know from version 2.1 and has replaced the "public" attribute  
which is around 2 years ago.
In Turba 2.0 the public attribute lead to not checking the owner and  
we like to have a similar concept for more than one address source  
(SQL table) which are readable by all and changeable by some admin  
users. This was no problem at all with the Turba 2.0 read_only,public  
and admin_users attributes but i failed to get it working with Turba  
2.3 without killing the owner field for the sources completely.

Any hints how to achieve this?

Andreas


-- 
All your trash belong to us ;-)  www.spamschlucker.org
To: stephan at spamschlucker.org