Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#26057 closed Bug (invalid)
Template {% if perms.app_label.permission %} check failing, but {% if 'app_label.permission' in perms %} works
Reported by: | McAnix | Owned by: | nobody |
---|---|---|---|
Component: | Template system | Version: | 1.8 |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | permissions |
Cc: | Triage Stage: | Unreviewed | |
Has patch: | no | Needs documentation: | no |
Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description (last modified by )
I'm encountering the issue above for dynamically generated permissions.
I have a Zone model (see below) in a project named "Core" that holds some content and dynamically builds row-level-like permissions for each entry using a post_save and post_delete hook to manage it. Please don't judge me on the usage, it was the simplest solution at the time and the Zone model content changes infrequently.
The issue I'm facing is when using the dynamic permissions in a template, even as admin. I've tested the following in the template:
{% if 'core.can_view_myzone' in perms %}Check passes{% endif %} <- WORKS {% if perms.core.can_view_myzone %}Check fails{% endif %} <- DOESN'T WORK
Also in the view:
print "CAN VIEW: %s" % request.user.has_perm('core.can_view_myzone') <- WORKS
Other permissions that are created via the permissions variable in the Meta class work fine BUT not if they're in the Zone model. I have checked migrations and the db tables for django_content_type/auth_permission and everything exists there and links correctly.
Middleware as follows:
MIDDLEWARE_CLASSES = ( 'django.middleware.common.CommonMiddleware', 'django.contrib.sessions.middleware.SessionMiddleware', 'django.contrib.auth.middleware.AuthenticationMiddleware', 'django.contrib.messages.middleware.MessageMiddleware', )
Template Context Processors:
TEMPLATE_CONTEXT_PROCESSORS = ('django.contrib.auth.context_processors.auth', 'django.core.context_processors.debug', 'django.core.context_processors.i18n', 'django.core.context_processors.media', 'django.core.context_processors.static', 'django.contrib.messages.context_processors.messages', 'djutils.context_processors.settings_loader') # This just exposes selected settings to the templates
class Zone(models.Model): """A holder model for zone information as well as permission slips for each zone""" class Meta: permissions = () cdate = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True) name = models.CharField(max_length=63) url = models.CharField(max_length=255, verbose_name="Zone URL") enabled = models.BooleanField() def __unicode__(self): return "%s (Enabled: %s)" % (self.name, self.enabled) def create_zone_permission(sender, instance, created, raw, using, **kwargs): """Creates a new zone permission entry for the new zone""" content_type = ContentType.objects.get(app_label='core', model='zone') codename = 'can_view_%s' % (instance.name, ) name='Can View %s' % (instance.name, ) if not Permission.objects.using(using).filter(codename=codename, content_type=content_type).exists(): logger.info("Creating zone specific permissions for %s" % (codename, )) Permission.objects.using(using).create(codename=codename, name=name, content_type=content_type) def delete_zone_permission(sender, instance, using, **kwargs): """Creates a new zone permission entry for the new zone""" content_type = ContentType.objects.get(app_label='core', model='zone') codename = 'can_view_%s' % (instance.name, ) if Permission.objects.using(using).filter(codename=codename, content_type=content_type).exists(): logger.info("Deleting zone specific permissions for %s" % (codename, )) permission = Permission.objects.using(using).filter(codename=codename, content_type=content_type) permission.delete(using=using) post_save.connect(create_zone_permission, sender=Zone) post_delete.connect(delete_zone_permission, sender=Zone)
Change History (3)
comment:1 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:2 by , 9 years ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:3 by , 9 years ago
Resolution: | → invalid |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
The issue was in the call:
which would split on the .