Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

en - Re: [sympa-users] merging or syncing subscriber table and user

Subject: The mailing list for listmasters using Sympa

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Mark K <address@concealed>
  • To: address@concealed
  • Subject: Re: [sympa-users] merging or syncing subscriber table and user
  • Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 02:44:53 +0000

I agree with the caveat of assuming that every 'subscriber' must first
be a 'user'. The user_table should have a incremented numeric primary
key called userid or something that is referenced in the subscriber
table. The admin_table should also user the userid key from the
user_table. One might even call that 'relational' :).



On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:01:44 -0800
Adam Bernstein <address@concealed> wrote:

> Serge, Olivier, et al.:
>
> I might have asked about this a long time ago, I'm sorry I'm not
> sure, but can't find anything in the archives: It has always been a
> headache that there are these two different tables that store
> different pieces of subscriber data, including some redundancy (eg.
> the full name, or "gecos"), and that only the subscriber table data
> is editable from the subscribers page. People should only have to
> (and only be able to) edit their name in one place and have the
> change show up everywhere, and I'd also like to take advantage of the
> extended database fields for data (like mailing address) that
> currently maps to the user table, not the subscriber table -- but I
> want it to be displayed and editable on the subscribers page. That
> page currently displays extra fields, but only from the subscriber
> table, not the user table.
>
> It just seems a fundamental requirement that each person should have
> one single profile that describes them, and it should be the same
> everywhere. I think there was some historical reason why Sympa wasn't
> built this way, but with all the improvements lately (eg. the picture
> upload, awesome!), it seems ever more important to rework it
> appropriately. The current scheme is, if you'll pardon me, a bit
> insane.
>
> Any chance of such a change in the near future? I could see it being
> a massive job, but I wonder if there's some way of linking or syncing
> the tables to produce the same effect without rewriting a whole lot
> of code.
>
> ab
>


--
Mark K



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Top of Page