Re: [WWdevel] Re: Feedback bug still there after update

[Sam H. <sh...@ma...>]

On Jan 29, 2006, at 15:59, John Jones wrote:

> This should now be fixed in cvs.

John,

Thanks for the fix. I merged it into rel-2-2-dev.
-sam

> Sam Hathaway wrote:
>
>> On Jan 25, 2006, at 16:07, Arnold Pizer wrote:
>>
>>> I updated webwork.rochester.edu to version rel-2-2-dev and  
>>> feedback  still doesn't work.  Actually this is a big pain. If  
>>> you use Course  Configuration, select E-mail, set
>>>  "E-mail feedback from students automatically sent to this   
>>> permission level and higher" to nobody, and then fill in   
>>> "Additional addresses for receiving feedback e-mail" you get an   
>>> error message that no recipients were selected when you try to  
>>> send  email. If you set the permission level to "prof" and then  
>>> add  additional addresses (e.g. the webwork TA!!), email is never  
>>> sent  to the additional addresses.  It looks like line that is  
>>> generated  in simple.conf (e.g.
>>> $mail{allowedFeedback} =   
>>> ['ap...@ma...','mp...@ma...'];
>>> )
>>> is never read.  I greped for "allowedFeedback" and the only place  
>>> I  saw that it appeared was in Constants.pm
>>
>>
>> Apparently there is a bug in the web-based configuration system.  
>> $mail {allowedFeedback} should actually be $mail 
>> {feedbackRecipients}.  Here's the pertinent code in Feedback.pm:
>>
>>     foreach my $rcptName ($db->listUsers()) {
>>         if ($authz->hasPermissions($rcptName, "receive_feedback")) {
>>             my $rcpt = $db->getUser($rcptName); # checked
>>             if ($rcpt and $rcpt->email_address) {
>>                 push @recipients, $rcpt->rfc822_mailbox;
>>             }
>>         }
>>     }
>>
>>     if (defined $ce->{mail}->{feedbackRecipients}) {
>>         push @recipients, @{$ce->{mail}->{feedbackRecipients}};
>>     }
>>
>> Constants.pm should be changed to refer to the correct variable.  
>> I've  filed a bug report on this issue: <http:// 
>> bugs.webwork.rochester.edu/ show_bug.cgi?id=961>.
>>
>> Thanks for going to the trouble to track this down.
>> -sam