Thread: [PATCH] pgarchives: pglister_sync: import lists with subscriber_access set to True

pglister_sync.py is a script used to synchronize things between pglister and pgarchives: lists, subscribers etc.

subscriber_access is not set in pglister_sync's query, and is set to null=False in Django's model. As a consequence,
pglister_syncfails to add new lists:
 
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/srv/pgarchives/local/loader/pglister_sync.py", line 68, in <module>
    'groupname': l['group']['groupname'],
psycopg2.errors.NotNullViolation: null value in column "subscriber_access" violates not-null constraint
DETAIL:  Failing row contains (8, test-pglister-sync, test-pglister-sync, , t, 1, null).

I don't know if there is a way to configure postgres to use the default value , but I think it would be wiser to
explicitlyset this variable in pglister_sync.py.
 


By default, subscriber_access is set to False and there is no way to modify that within the web interface.
As a consequence, access to lists on private servers is restricted to superusers, and there is no easier way to modify
thatthan to edit the database manually.
 

It seems more logical to me that this value be set to True by default, as access can still be moderated to avoid lists
beingpublicly available.
 

That said, it may be better to have a way to modify that within the web interface in pglister.

-- 
Célestin Matte

Sorry, accidentally sent unfinished email containing contradictory information... Please ignore the previous one.


pglister_sync.py is a script used to synchronize things between pglister and pgarchives: lists, subscribers etc.

subscriber_access is not set in pglister_sync's query, and is set to null=False in Django's model. As a consequence,
pglister_syncfails to add new lists:
 
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/srv/pgarchives/local/loader/pglister_sync.py", line 68, in <module>
    'groupname': l['group']['groupname'],
psycopg2.errors.NotNullViolation: null value in column "subscriber_access" violates not-null constraint
DETAIL:  Failing row contains (8, test-pglister-sync, test-pglister-sync, , t, 1, null).

I don't know if there is a way to configure postgres to use the default value , but I think it would be wiser to
explicitlyset this variable in pglister_sync.py (attached patch in previous email)
 

It seems more logical to me to set this value to True, as otherwise access to lists on private servers is restricted to
superusers,and there is no easier way to modify that than to edit the database manually. But then, the model may need
tobe update to have this value set to default=True as well. What do you think?
 

That said, it may be better to have a way to modify that within the web interface in pglister.
-- 
Célestin Matte

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 6:37 PM Célestin Matte <celestin.matte@cmatte.me> wrote:
>
> pglister_sync.py is a script used to synchronize things between pglister and pgarchives: lists, subscribers etc.
>
> subscriber_access is not set in pglister_sync's query, and is set to null=False in Django's model. As a consequence,
pglister_syncfails to add new lists: 
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/srv/pgarchives/local/loader/pglister_sync.py", line 68, in <module>
>     'groupname': l['group']['groupname'],
> psycopg2.errors.NotNullViolation: null value in column "subscriber_access" violates not-null constraint
> DETAIL:  Failing row contains (8, test-pglister-sync, test-pglister-sync, , t, 1, null).
>
> I don't know if there is a way to configure postgres to use the default value , but I think it would be wiser to
explicitlyset this variable in pglister_sync.py. 

Interesting. Yes there is, set the columns default to false. Which is
what is running on both our production servers for postgresql.org --
but I'm unsure how it actually got there given that Django is dumb
enough not to propagate that down to the database, assuming all access
will forever be through the ORM. We must've done some manual step when
deploying that, that has since been forgotten.

This should definitely be fixed.

> By default, subscriber_access is set to False and there is no way to modify that within the web interface.
> As a consequence, access to lists on private servers is restricted to superusers, and there is no easier way to
modifythat than to edit the database manually. 
>
> It seems more logical to me that this value be set to True by default, as access can still be moderated to avoid
listsbeing publicly available. 

In what way would access "still be moderated"? In pgarchives, that's a
pure boolean and there are no further checks. User accounts are
auto-created.

The idea is that anything that's "open" should have to be set
explicitly and thus we should default to it being off. Based on that I
have at least initially applied a version of your patch that sets it
to false.


> That said, it may be better to have a way to modify that within the web interface in pglister.

I agree in principle. The argument does fall off a bit on the fact
that there is *no* admin interface to pgarchives. You don't have a way
to add a list manually either, without doing it directly in SQL. So we
either accept that SQL is the way things are done, or we should tackle
the bigger problem of setting up such an interface. But I think we
could get pretty far by just enabling the general django admin
interface and set up the required classes for that -- we don't
necessarily need to move things like reparsing and hiding of messages
into such an admin interface.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/

> This should definitely be fixed.

Thanks!

>> By default, subscriber_access is set to False and there is no way to modify that within the web interface.
>> As a consequence, access to lists on private servers is restricted to superusers, and there is no easier way to
modifythat than to edit the database manually.
 
>>
>> It seems more logical to me that this value be set to True by default, as access can still be moderated to avoid
listsbeing publicly available.
 
> 
> In what way would access "still be moderated"? In pgarchives, that's a
> pure boolean and there are no further checks. User accounts are
> auto-created.

I meant that subscriptions can still be moderated in pglister (if lists are configured that way), so that anybody does
nothave access to archives.
 

> The idea is that anything that's "open" should have to be set
> explicitly and thus we should default to it being off. Based on that I
> have at least initially applied a version of your patch that sets it
> to false.

That makes sense.

>> That said, it may be better to have a way to modify that within the web interface in pglister.
> 
> I agree in principle. The argument does fall off a bit on the fact
> that there is *no* admin interface to pgarchives. You don't have a way
> to add a list manually either, without doing it directly in SQL. So we
> either accept that SQL is the way things are done, or we should tackle
> the bigger problem of setting up such an interface. But I think we
> could get pretty far by just enabling the general django admin
> interface and set up the required classes for that -- we don't
> necessarily need to move things like reparsing and hiding of messages
> into such an admin interface.

I meant this could be added in the admin interface of pglister, not pgarchives, as it already exists and pglister_sync
canthen push (and update) the configuration to pgarchives.
 


-- 
Célestin Matte

On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 9:16 AM Célestin Matte <celestin.matte@cmatte.me> wrote:
>
> > This should definitely be fixed.
>
> Thanks!
>
> >> By default, subscriber_access is set to False and there is no way to modify that within the web interface.
> >> As a consequence, access to lists on private servers is restricted to superusers, and there is no easier way to
modifythat than to edit the database manually. 
> >>
> >> It seems more logical to me that this value be set to True by default, as access can still be moderated to avoid
listsbeing publicly available. 
> >
> > In what way would access "still be moderated"? In pgarchives, that's a
> > pure boolean and there are no further checks. User accounts are
> > auto-created.
>
> I meant that subscriptions can still be moderated in pglister (if lists are configured that way), so that anybody
doesnot have access to archives. 

Ah, right. That still doesn't fully solve the problem though --
because once somebody has been approved in moderation, they
automatically get access to everything on the list from before they
were added. Which may not be what's wanted -- we have cases where
we're archiving things for "no regular use", but leave it for
superusers to be able to go look things up in an emergency for
example. In that usecase, it's not tied to the subscription at all.


> > The idea is that anything that's "open" should have to be set
> > explicitly and thus we should default to it being off. Based on that I
> > have at least initially applied a version of your patch that sets it
> > to false.
>
> That makes sense.
>
> >> That said, it may be better to have a way to modify that within the web interface in pglister.
> >
> > I agree in principle. The argument does fall off a bit on the fact
> > that there is *no* admin interface to pgarchives. You don't have a way
> > to add a list manually either, without doing it directly in SQL. So we
> > either accept that SQL is the way things are done, or we should tackle
> > the bigger problem of setting up such an interface. But I think we
> > could get pretty far by just enabling the general django admin
> > interface and set up the required classes for that -- we don't
> > necessarily need to move things like reparsing and hiding of messages
> > into such an admin interface.
>
> I meant this could be added in the admin interface of pglister, not pgarchives, as it already exists and
pglister_synccan then push (and update) the configuration to pgarchives. 

Ah, then I understand.

That's an interesting aspect. Right now, pglister has no knowledge of
what actually runs on the archiving side other than "send the emails
over here" and "create links that look like this".

In general, I like that level of disconnect -- it should be possible
to swap out the archive solution from underneath it, or indeed run the
same pglister instance against multiple different types of archives.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/

Attached another proposed solution to that problem, with a series of patches for pglister and pgarchives:
- 0001-Add-subscriber_access-field-to-ListGroup_pglister.patch adds a subscriber_access field in pglister's admin
section
- 0002-Add-subscriber_access-to-archives-API_pglister.patch adds subscriber_access to the API's archive section in
pglister
- 0001-pglister_sync-obtain-subscriber_access-from-API_pgarchives.patch uses the value received from the API instead of
adefault "False" that has to be manually changed
 

As a reminder, the problem was that subscriber_access was set to False by default, which means that any list created on
pglisterand set to be archived on pgarchives won't be reachable by subscribers, unless the subscriber_access field is
manuallymodified in the database.
 
-- 
Célestin Matte

Update: previously attached patches were incorrectly using subscriber_access in ListGroup, although it's a field of
Listin pgarchives.
 
Besides, they were not built on top of upstream. Please note that this set of patches is built on top of the patch I
sentin gitlab [1], as upstream currently crashes on migration.
 
New sets of patched attached.

[1] https://gitlab.com/pglister/pglister/-/merge_requests/33

On 28/02/2023 11:39, Célestin Matte wrote:
> Attached another proposed solution to that problem, with a series of patches for pglister and pgarchives:
> - 0001-Add-subscriber_access-field-to-ListGroup_pglister.patch adds a subscriber_access field in pglister's admin
section
> - 0002-Add-subscriber_access-to-archives-API_pglister.patch adds subscriber_access to the API's archive section in
pglister
> - 0001-pglister_sync-obtain-subscriber_access-from-API_pgarchives.patch uses the value received from the API instead
ofa default "False" that has to be manually changed
 
> 
> As a reminder, the problem was that subscriber_access was set to False by default, which means that any list created
onpglister and set to be archived on pgarchives won't be reachable by subscribers, unless the subscriber_access field
ismanually modified in the database.
 

-- 
Célestin Matte

On 05/02/2022 18:24, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> In general, I like that level of disconnect -- it should be possible
> to swap out the archive solution from underneath it, or indeed run the
> same pglister instance against multiple different types of archives.

Re-reading this thread, I now understand that the patches I sent later on did not satisfy this requirement.
Having no way to give access to without resorting to SQL does not seem ideal to me, though. Should I push a patch to
activatethe admin interface on pgarchives, as mentioned earlier in the thread?
 

-- 
Célestin Matte