Loris: [examiner] Examiner link broken permissions

[maltheism]

I'm not able to replicate this bug on test.loris.ca and it only occurs after installing LORIS with importing the Rasinbread data. Basically, when clicking on a link for an examiner from the Examiner column of the table. The result is the "You do not have access to this page." and this happens while being logged into an admin account.

[ridz1208]

this module has a custom _hasAccess function. it seems to be intentional.

@driusan I guess we should just add IF SUPERUSER RETURN TRUE ALWAYS ?

[zaliqarosli]

@maltheism do you have certification enabled?

[maltheism]

@zaliqarosli I'm not sure, can you clarify that a bit more?

[driusan]

@ridz1208 hasPermission should already incorporate "IF SUPERUSER RETURN TRUE ALWAYS"

[ridz1208]

Sold

Task: add return true if superuser

[zaliqarosli]

@maltheism you should have <Certification><EnableCertification>1</EnableCertification> in your project/config.xml file

[johnsaigle]

@ridz1208 This already happens? Not sure what you're referring to exactly.
https://github.com/aces/Loris/blob/524f51a9993dba3153b18c982d17c10a287a50c5/php/libraries/UserPermissions.class.inc#L112-L116

[ridz1208]

@johnsaigle ma bad I misread Dave's comment.

[johnsaigle]

So the question is should superusers be able to access edit examiner page even if Certification is disabled in the config file?

[zaliqarosli]

i wouldn't think so? good question. so far, they haven't been able to with certification disabled

[ridz1208]

No I dont think so either, but there should be an error message saying this feature is not in use. because technically "editing examiners" is nothing more then giving certifications. Maybe we should change it to "Certify examiner" or something.

its not however necessary to add this to 21.0.0 it could easily be done for 21.1. we could simply amend the test plan to reflect the current state of things for this release.

@driusan what do you think ?

[driusan]

Is the examiner module in the menus in the default LORIS install? If so, I think we should incorporate a check of the config/error message (I don't think it would be a complicated check to add..), if not, amending the test plan might be easier.

In either case I don't think it's a blocker for 21.0.0 if it's just a case of trying to use the module while the config is disabled.

[ridz1208]

@suzanne-lee add a configuration exception if feature is disabled.

Thanks

[suzanne-lee]

PR sent : #4895

[cmadjar]

Should be fixed by #4895 so closing the issue