[Ldap] Add users extraFields in ldap component #31532
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
0ba3e7b to
abf0a13
Compare
OskarStark
reviewed
May 18, 2019
abf0a13 to
353adf8
Compare
|
What about naming this "extra_fields"? This doesn't look like metadata to me. |
|
done @nicolas-grekas |
a8aad38 to
33988b1
Compare
|
@fabpot this is ready |
|
LGTM 👍 |
csarrazi
approved these changes
Jun 21, 2019
fabpot
requested changes
Jun 22, 2019
src/Symfony/Bundle/SecurityBundle/Resources/config/security.xml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
33988b1 to
bcfff04
Compare
|
@fabpot PR updated |
fabpot
approved these changes
Jun 22, 2019
|
Thank you @Simperfit. |
fabpot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2019
…fit) This PR was merged into the 4.4 branch. Discussion ---------- [Ldap] Add users extraFields in ldap component | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | master | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | yes <!-- please update src/**/CHANGELOG.md files --> | BC breaks? | no <!-- see https://symfony.com/bc --> | Deprecations? | yes <!-- please update UPGRADE-*.md and src/**/CHANGELOG.md files --> | Tests pass? | yes <!-- please add some, will be required by reviewers --> | Fixed tickets | #28873, #19329 <!-- #-prefixed issue number(s), if any --> | License | MIT | Doc PR | todo when validated, before merge <!-- required for new features --> As I'm using ldap too in some personal project, It seems that this feature is a really good nice to have IMHO. Adding the wanted field in the `user_metadata` array transform them as field -> value in the `metadata` field of the user. Commits ------- bcfff04 [Ldap] Add users extra_fields in ldap component
chalasr
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2019
This PR was merged into the 4.4 branch. Discussion ---------- [Security] add return type declaration | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 4.4 | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | #31532 | License | MIT | Doc PR | Commits ------- 9fe532d add return type declaration
This was referenced Nov 12, 2019
Merged
Merged
chalasr
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2020
This PR was squashed before being merged into the 4.4 branch (closes #37177). Discussion ---------- [Ldap] fix refreshUser() ignoring extra_fields | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 4.4 | Bug fix? | yes | New feature? | no | Deprecations? |no | Tickets | - | License | MIT | Doc PR | - While #31532 introduced `extra_fields` in general, #32824 later added `LdapUser` & `LdapUserProvider` and ignored `extra_fields` on `refreshUser()`. This PR fixes `refreshUser()` and adds a test which makes sure, that the refreshed ldap user doesn't lose its default values. Commits ------- cb8f129 [Ldap] fix refreshUser() ignoring extra_fields
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As I'm using ldap too in some personal project, It seems that this feature is a really good nice to have IMHO.
Adding the wanted field in the
user_metadataarray transform them as field -> value in themetadatafield of the user.