thanks @thatguy, i just tried your patch on my Drupal 9.5.2 and Group 3.1.0 and it fixed the problem (:
- 🇧🇪Belgium kristiaanvandeneynde Antwerp, Belgium
+++ b/quick_node_clone.module @@ -84,15 +86,14 @@ function _quick_node_clone_has_clone_permission(ContentEntityInterface $node) { + $group_relationships = GroupRelationship::loadByEntity($node); + foreach ($group_relationships as $group_relationship) { + // Check that user has a permission to create relationship. + $plugin_manager = \Drupal::service('group_relation_type.manager'); + assert($plugin_manager instanceof GroupRelationTypeManagerInterface); + $access_handler = $plugin_manager->getAccessControlHandler($group_relationship->getPluginId()); + $access_check = $access_handler->entityCreateAccess($group_relationship->getGroup(), $current_user); + $access = AccessResult::allowedIf($access_check);
This only checks the access control by Group itself. Ideally, you check for access control on the group relationship entity type while providing the right bundle. Then, if another module implements the create access hook, that is also taken into account.
- 🇺🇸United States somebodysysop
So, I am running quick node clone 8.x-1.16. If I want to install Group 2.x (coming from 1.x), so if I apply patch #5 I'm good.
But, what about this? https://www.drupal.org/project/quick_node_clone/issues/3306677#comment-1... ✨ Intercompatibility with Group module new versions Needs work
Does this need to be applied also, and if so, how?
Thanks!
- 🇳🇱Netherlands ricovandevin
Patch #5 does not apply against Group 2.x. Patch #2 does not apply either and seems to be missing most of the code it should add. The approach in 🐛 Group module - Error: Class Drupal\group\Entity\GroupContent not found Needs review seems quite hacky. It seems that at this point there is no proper way to use Quick Node Clone with Group 2.x.
- last update
about 1 year ago 3 pass - Status changed to Needs review
about 1 year ago 8:09pm 7 December 2023 - last update
about 1 year ago 3 pass - 🇳🇱Netherlands ricovandevin
The MR aims to work for Group 2.x with backwards compatibility for Group 1.x (did not test it on 1.x). Not sure if it works for Group 3.x too. I think Group 3.x deserves it's own solution without BC for 1.x, maybe in a new major release for Quick Node Clone.
- First commit to issue fork.
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
The changes in the MR look pretty good to be for providing support for 2.x along with backwards compatibility with 1.x, but I am a bit conflicted about how to continue to support the Group module effectively given these compatibility breaks and the ones in 3.x → .
We could just cut a new major version release that drops Group 1.x/2.x support and adds support for 3 but it feel strange given that we don't have any hard dependencies on the group module. If we did, we could use semantic versioning to help us here, but then we would be forcing people to install the Group module when they may have no use for it.
I wonder if the right solution is to break this functionality into a sub-module (`quick_node_clone_group`?) Are there any arguments against that path? If not, we could ship this MR and create a new issue to tackle the sub-module.
- 🇺🇸United States somebodysysop
drops Group 1.x/2.x support
I'm not sure about this, but aren't the majority of people using the Group module using either 1.x or 2.x?
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
I'm not sure about this, but aren't the majority of people using the Group module using either 1.x or 2.x?
According to the usage stats more people are using 3.x than 2.x → , but both of those constituencies are growing with 1.x shrinking. The problem here is that without any kind of explicit requirement via semantic versioning the implication is that this module supports them all.
- 🇧🇪Belgium kristiaanvandeneynde Antwerp, Belgium
Perhaps you could get away with an entity type definition check or a group version check?
This:
$group_contents = $this->entityTypeManager->getStorage('group_content')->loadByEntity($original_entity);
would become something like:$entity_type_id = $group_version_2 ? 'group_content' : 'group_relationship'; $group_contents = $this->entityTypeManager->getStorage($group_version_2)->loadByEntity($original_entity);
Or:
$entity_type_id = $group_content_entity_type_exists ? 'group_content' : 'group_relationship'; $group_contents = $this->entityTypeManager->getStorage($group_version_2)->loadByEntity($original_entity);
I've not recommended something like the above before because it's usually cumbersome for Group-supporting modules to have to use that all over the place, but here it seems to be limited to one spot so it might just work.
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
Please submit any changes via the current or a new merge request so that GitLabCI tests will run against it. Thank you!
- Merge request !20Issue #3306677 by thatguy, kksandr: Added support for groups version 3 → (Merged) created by Unnamed author
- 🇺🇸United States adriancotter
I just want to weigh in on the question of Group 2.0 and 3.0 support which didn't have a particularly clear answer above. Both 2.0 and 3.0 are currently supported Group versions and will be for some time -- or such is my understanding. I just updated from 1.0 to 2.0 for instance. The module page says:
"Note: functionality between version 2 and 3 are kept in sync. Version 3 does not have an upgrade path from version 2 or version 1 as it requires a migration."
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
This is a complicated problem to solve elegantly.
Both 2.0 and 3.0 are currently supported Group versions and will be for some time -- or such is my understanding
Given this, I am inclined to prioritize reviewing and merging support for 2.x (MR17) and then circle back to 3.x maybe with a new issue. All that to say, please review and provide feedback on MR 17.
Having looked at the group code, merge request #20 should work fine with groups 2 and 3.
The only difference between versions 2 and 3 is the machine name of the relationship entities: group_content -> group_relationship.
The group integration from #20 uses the
GroupRelationship
(2, 3) class, thegroup_relation_type.manager
(2, 3) service, and the group entity methodaddRelationship
(2, 3). All of them are in versions 2 and 3. That is, the machine name is not used directly to load relationship entities.I added support for group version 1 in merge request #20. That is, it now supports all versions of groups.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to cover this with tests? That is, run tests with different versions of groups.
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
I added support for group version 1 in merge request #20. That is, it now supports all versions of groups.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to cover this with tests? That is, run tests with different versions of groups.
Thank you @kksandr! In that case, I agree, let's turn our attention to MR 20.
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
@kksandr Thank you for your work on this, especially with the new tests! Do we need to add anything test-wise for Group v3?
-
markdorison →
committed 188e0d46 on 8.x-1.x authored by
kksandr →
Issue #3306677 by kksandr, markdorison, ricovandevin, thatguy, MaxMendez...
-
markdorison →
committed 188e0d46 on 8.x-1.x authored by
kksandr →
- Status changed to Fixed
11 months ago 8:38pm 24 January 2024 Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.
- 🇺🇸United States markdorison
Thanks for the bump. 8.x-1.18 has been released with this included.