We're currently testing the new version 3.10.2 upgrade and find that we still cannot get workflows to function correctly with group cascade.
Specifically, if a workflow step:condition is tied to a group (Web Coordinator) with an LDAP user inside the group (John Mackay) then John Mackay can complete that step of the workflow. Group structure depicted in Figure 1 below.
[quote][/quote]
However, If the workflow is tied to a group (ROLE:Testing) that contains another group (Web Coordinator) which contains the LDAP user (John Mackay) then then John Mackay can only reject the changes. Group structure depicted in Figure 2 below.
[quote][/quote]
Note that linking John Mackay outside of the web coordinator directly into the Group ROLE: Testing works. In other words as far as workflows are concerned the user must be an immediate child of the group assigned to the workfow.
Actually, I think you did that for me last month (#1727). You mentioned in my previous post that you thought it had been fixed in 3.10.1 but this doesn’t appear to be the case. Also a check in the Bug tracker shows that a fix has been implemented in your development version 3.11.0.
Do you know which stable version this will be released in and when?
Do you have a ballpark as it is an administartion pita having to manage individual users in groups as well as in workflows? Also, can you check with colivar if it was just the immediate inheritance issue that was fixed in 3.11.0 or if that cascade inheritance was also fixed?
The ballpark is anytime between January to March of 2007, I believe.
As for your second question, Christophe modified the function that retrieves the children of a group to determine if there are shadow assets at a lower level. This fix would probably resolve both issues.l