Bug #6695
closedMember reply to announcement goes to Commons address
0%
Description
A member in a group replied to an announcement; the reply went to the Commons email address. This seems like a similar issue to what we saw in ticket #6674
Screenshot attached
Files
Related issues
Updated by Matt Gold about 8 years ago
- Related to Bug #6674: Member RBE responses to document uploads added
Updated by Boone Gorges about 8 years ago
- Assignee changed from Boone Gorges to Raymond Hoh
- Target version set to 1.10.2
Ray, is this a regression? I can't remember whether RBE natively handles our group announcements (which are standard BP activity items).
Updated by Raymond Hoh about 8 years ago
This sounds like a regression.
We disabled RBE for group announcements, but this looks to have broken since using the new BuddyPress email system.
This is probably due to the way I had to reconfigure RBE so it would work with BP emails. Probably an action/filter firing order issue.
Will look into it.
Updated by Raymond Hoh about 8 years ago
The non-RBE notice should be back again. See:
https://github.com/cuny-academic-commons/cac/commit/53b293d3818fb3d46473d028f8b458d109c690ea
This is available for testing on cdev.
As for the reply to the group announcement itself, I forget what we did in the previous iteration of emails. Where did replies to non-RBE content go to? commons@gc.cuny.edu
or cunycommons@gmail.com
or some other email address?
Updated by Matt Gold about 8 years ago
Hi All --
Have we instituted the feature where "announcements" are deprecated but group admins have the ability to force their messages out to everyone, regardless of email setting? If so, I think RBE should be enabled on announcements, since they'll just be like forum posts but ones that have also been forced out via email. I would say that replies to announcements should not override user email preferences. Thoughts?
Updated by Boone Gorges about 8 years ago
Have we instituted the feature where "announcements" are deprecated but group admins have the ability to force their messages out to everyone, regardless of email setting?
Not yet. https://redmine.gc.cuny.edu/issues/3175
If so, I think RBE should be enabled on announcements, since they'll just be like forum posts but ones that have also been forced out via email. I would say that replies to announcements should not override user email preferences. Thoughts?
This seems right to me.
Updated by Boone Gorges about 8 years ago
- Related to Feature #3175: Replace Announcements with a force-email option on new forum posts added
Updated by Boone Gorges about 8 years ago
As for the reply to the group announcement itself, I forget what we did in the previous iteration of emails. Where did replies to non-RBE content go to? commons@gc.cuny.edu or cunycommons@gmail.com or some other email address?
I thought they went to the RBE email address, which then responded that the particular item doesn't support replying by email.
Updated by Raymond Hoh about 8 years ago
If so, I think RBE should be enabled on announcements, since they'll just be like forum posts but ones that have also been forced out via email. I would say that replies to announcements should not override user email preferences. Thoughts?
There was a reason why we disabled RBE for group announcements. See #2686.
People cannot reply to group announcements on the frontend, so we chose to disable RBE for group announcements as well. Also, only those subscribed via the group's "All Mail" option could reply to group announcements.
We can revert this behavior, but I think #3175 might be more appropriate to turn RBE back on for group announcements.
Updated by Boone Gorges about 8 years ago
We can revert this behavior, but I think #3175 might be more appropriate to turn RBE back on for group announcements.
I agree with this. Does that mean there's nothing left to do on this ticket?
Updated by Boone Gorges about 8 years ago
- Target version changed from 1.10.2 to 1.10.3
Updated by Raymond Hoh about 8 years ago
- Status changed from Assigned to Duplicate
I agree with this. Does that mean there's nothing left to do on this ticket?
That's correct. Let's close this in favor for #3175.