| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On 2011-10-13 15:06, Robert Collins wrote:
Curtis script expunges dangling team join requests; expiring them
would involve notifications ('sorry your request was not replied to'),
and that would be bogus if e.g. the person had been deleted (or
alternatively merged into someone in the team). Neither case can
happen if the person merge bug is fixed.
It was stupid of me to ignore notifications. But is this really a case of "membership request expiry is harder with the broken data still in place," or is it actually "notifying users of anything related to membership requests is harder with the broken data still in place"?
ISTM the notification code needs to be robust against this sort of thing as a matter of necessity. Wasn't similar robustness built in back when we realized that users don't always have preferred email addresses?
Jeroen
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
