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

[MailingListe]

Zitat von Michael Rubinsky <mrubinsk at horde.org>:

> Quoting MailingListe <lst_hoe02 at kwsoft.de>:
>
>> 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 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.
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> This is not true, the owner field has been required for 8 years  
>>> when public address books have been added to Turba.
>>
>>
>> Required for sure but not checked if public=true for the non  
>> "admin" users and that is the problem we try to solve. We are not  
>> able to create permissions in the horde settings for addressbooks  
>> as "read-only for all" with use_share=false as long as the owner  
>> attribute is present in source.php. We have as of today for example  
>> the listed source (read-only for all, writeable by admin) and try  
>> to get this working with Turba 2.3 and use_shares=false for this  
>> source with permissions set in horde but all failed until we remove  
>> the __owner??
>
> If the source is a global, read only address book, that is not using  
> shares then there really is no concept of an owner...why is it that  
> you need/want one?
>

I like the owner to be set anyway because we may switch to use_shares  
in the future and we like to see who have added the contact.

Regards

Andreas

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