On 3/23/07, sedat ciftci <sedatciftci yahoo.com> wrote:
> If you prefer that design, I can change it and
> re-submit the patch.
> Sedat Çiftçi
Yes, please. I think the consensus is that we'd rather avoid
new table
creation in this enhancement.
- Dave
>
> --- Dave <snoopdave gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 3/21/07, sedat ciftci <sedatciftci yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Yes, it can also be done with this design.
Note
> > that,
> > > in this design you have to clear the
> > activationCode
> > > (or make something else, to mark that it is
used)
> > > after the account is activated (Also in my
design,
> > I
> > > delete the related record from useractivate
> > table).
> > > The reason behind this requirement can be
> > explained as
> > > follows:
> > > Let's assume that a user registers with
e-mail
> > > activation and assume that the related
> > activationCode
> > > is not deleted. After a while, admin user
wants to
> > > disable the account of this user from the
"User
> > Admin"
> > > menu of the Server Administration and
disables it.
> > > Then, if the user clicks the activation link
in
> > the
> > > sent activation mail (assume user stores it;
did
> > not
> > > delete it), his/her account is enabled
again.
> > Because
> > > of this simple scenario, do not forget to
mark the
> > > activated accounts so that the link in the
sent
> > > activation mail will not be used again once
it is
> > > used.
> >
> > Sedat,
> >
> > Are you willing to change the design to remove
the
> > new table and then
> > re-submit the patch?
> >
> > - Dave
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
________________________
> Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
> Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/feat
ures_spam.html
>
|