Jump to content
adrian

Email New User

Recommended Posts

Just now, jmartsch said:

Yes, I removed that line, but email is still not being sent.

I even set autoload to true in the settings file, but that changes nothing.

Don't know why the email is not sent

Is this site online? Can I take a look?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just tested with Mail Interceptor and it's catching the email just fine. Would you mind debugging the sendNewUserEmail() function - see if it's being called at all and where it is failing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Adrian, I spotted another bug.

If you go to the modules settings and check the "Generate Password" option, then after saving an error occurs: "Session: You need to have digits and at least one of the letter options checked."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jmartsch said:

Hey Adrian, I spotted another bug.

If you go to the modules settings and check the "Generate Password" option, then after saving an error occurs: "Session: You need to have digits and at least one of the letter options checked."

Sorry about that - I wasn't seeing that because I had an older, updated install that already had those options stored in the settings database.

New version just committed fixes it.

Thanks again!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Adrian, I have a question :) 

I implemented login via link base on @Ivan Gretsky's code snippet: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/13708-login-with-a-link-is-it-called-magic-link/?do=findComment&comment=155465

I'm also using your module so that the site manager creating the users in the admin does not have to send the very first email to the user manually. The module sends the email successfully but I have a two issues:

  • While http://example.com/?user={id}&token={login_token} is turned into the proper "link", hardcoding the protocol+domain is not a good idea and {adminUrl} is not what I need.
  • I also implemented a simple form asking for an email only. When submitted,  the login token is regenerated for the user (associated with that email) and an email is sent with the new login link in it. It would be great to be able to base these two emails (mail sent by this module and mail sent by my form) on the same template, meaning they should be identical without me implementing them twice.

My function to send the new link via email is dead simple:

<?php
function site_email_user_login_info($login_user) {
    createLoginToken($login_user);
    $login_link = createLoginLink($login_user);
    $mail = wireMail();
    $mail->to($login_user->email);
    $mail->from('contact@example.com');
    $mail->subject('How to login...');
    $mail->bodyHTML("<html><body>
                        <h2>Some dummy header</h2>
                        <p>Some placeholder text. Blah-blah. Please click to login:</p>
                        <a href='{$login_link}'>{$login_link}</a>
                     </body></html>");
    $mail->send();
}

It is bodyHTML and the module's Email Massage which should be populated from the same source. Could you please give me some guidance on how to achieve this? Is it possible?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @szabesz - if I understand correctly, I think you could make use of this module instead of your custom site_email_user_login_info() function.

Via the API you can use:

$u->sendEmail = true;

If you need to adjust the body of the email (both via admin and frontent/API), you can hook into: EmailNewUser:: parseBody - you could add your own logic for dynamically building the http://example.com/?user={id}&token={login_token} link without hardcoding anything.

https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7051-email-new-user/?do=findComment&comment=136252

Let me know how you go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, adrian said:

EmailNewUser:: parseBody

Thank you Adrian, this is what I need. I've long forgotten about it even though I did read your post.

I've just refactored my code to take advantage of it and everything works as expected, great module as always!

As for $u->sendEmail = true; I do not need it because my frontend form is not for creating new users but for sending an email to existing users. Why sending the same email? Because already registered users might have long forgotten how to login to the system so I want to send the same instructions no matter what. I will probably introduce a slight difference based on some simple logic but most part of the email body will be the same. For this reason I use the hook to completely overwrite $htmlBody which I find easier to implement than using str_replace and such to change something created in the RTE.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @adrian,

My first time using this lovely module. A question and a couple of requests...

When editing/saving a user in admin, under what circumstances is an email sent if the "Automatic Email Send" option is checked? For existing users (who may have already been sent their welcome message) will an email be sent if nothing is changed but the user just saved? Silly me, I was trying to work it out from the code rather than just trying it out. I see now that the interface changes to "Re-send welcome message" after the first user save.

Request 1: It would be cool if there was an option in the module config to select key fields in the user template, where if any of those fields have changed the user is automatically sent an email. The obvious fields to trigger this would be "name" and "pass", but it would be nice to include custom fields too because in my case users log in with their email address. If other fields are changed no email would be sent. As I type this another thought occurs to me - maybe there could be different email templates for "new user" (password old value is blank) versus "modified user" (key field has changed)?

Request 2: How about a module config option for not showing the "Send welcome message" checkbox and the "Email message" CKEditor field in Edit User? In my scenario there are several different roles with different user-admin privileges. I'd rather take the decisions out of their hands whether or not to send an email and what the message will be.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Robin S

All the "Automatic Email Send" option does is check the "Send welcome message" option when creating a new user. It doesn't have any impact on existing users, but there is an option to "Resend Welcome Message" to an existing user. This will re-generate a new password if that option is selected.

As for your requests, unfortunately I just don't have time at the moment as those look relatively substantial, but they sound useful. I think "2" especially sounds like a good idea. I am not sure about "1" - it sounds like it might be beyond the scope of "Email New User", but I am happy to be convinced that it's a worthwhile addition.

There's realistically no chance of me getting to this until late May, but of course PRs are always greatly appreciated :) Sorry I can't help out in a reasonable timeframe on this one!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @adrian, no worries. The needs of my current project are fairly specific/unique so I'm not sure yet whether I'll modify the Email New User module or make a new custom module. I'm sure your module will be a big help in either case, and if I do make some additions to Email New User that could be useful to others I'll certainly share them here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey @Robin S - I think Request 2 would be pretty quick to implement, so might take a look at that when I am procrastinating from work.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Robin S said:

Request 1: It would be cool if there was an option in the module config to select key fields in the user template, where if any of those fields have changed the user is automatically sent an email.

Just chiming in to point out that this sounds like something that might be better solved by the Field Change Notifier module. I'm not sure what the state of said module is, and it doesn't currently seem to support selecting notified user based on the page being edited either, but perhaps it would be easier to adapt to this need? :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @adrian, just a heads up:

I was again experiencing this issue that you raised in the PW issues repo a while ago: https://github.com/processwire/processwire-issues/issues/432

It was a bit puzzling but I traced it back to the Email New User module which I was testing out. Due to this commit the module is undoing the fix that was applied in the PW core.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Robin S - sorry about that. I can try to take a look tomorrow, but maybe in the meantime @Torsten Baldes could also see if there is an alternative to that commit of his that fixed the password issue, but not have the side-effect of breaking user saving?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey @Robin S - I just had a quick look and I can't actually see any issues with saving a user. Maybe I am doing doing the right thing, but can you please explain exactly what is required to reproduce?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, adrian said:

can you please explain exactly what is required to reproduce

The issue is exactly as you described it in the GitHub issue I linked to above. It is related to the browser autofilling the password field, so it depends on the form history that is saved in your browser. It's not the kind of thing that will always cause a problem, more one that can (but shouldn't) cause a problem. The fix that Ryan pushed to the core was to avoid that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@adrian, looking at the commit that introduced the issue, it looks like removing the autocomplete attribute is an attempt to defeat this piece of InputfieldPassword.js.

That piece of JS is a fairly old (and hacky) response to a browser-specific (Firefox) issue that probably no longer applies. The recent autofill fixes in InputfieldPassword and updates/bug-fixes to Firefox should have solved it without the need for that JS workaround (I tested quickly in the latest Firefox and couldn't see any issue with the JS removed). So you could raise a GitHub issue/request to see if Ryan will remove that JS.

In the custom module I made for a project recently I took a different approach to auto-generated passwords. Rather than populate the core password field I manipulated the ProcessUser form to...

1. Hide the password field with CSS

2. Add a markup field to show the user the auto-generated password

3. Add a hidden field containing the auto-generated password

Then in a before hook to InputfieldPassword::processInput I copy the password value from the hidden field to the password field in $input.

That may not be an approach you'd want to take with your module, but just to show there might be other ways to tackle things if Ryan doesn't want to remove that problematic JS.

Edited by Robin S
Corrected hook method to InputfieldPassword::processInput
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for looking into this @Robin S - what actually caused @Torsten Baldes to make that recent change is this recent commit by Ryan: https://github.com/processwire/processwire/commit/ba21b28b4ec6cf4651a618561f8faa149497f7e4#diff-b49b5256779b14f5ffbe105307aa2be2

Everything in this module was working fine until that change in the PW core! Unfortunately I don't see Ryan removing that code because the change was to help fix a recently reported bug. Perhaps I can convince him to add an additional check though. What I have come up with that seems to work is to replace:

https://github.com/processwire/processwire/blob/184059b5d66a6ed8c739594d6b51d8d11f17d62d/wire/modules/Inputfield/InputfieldPassword/InputfieldPassword.js#L175

if($(this).val().length < 1) return;

with:

if($(this).val().length < 1 || $(this).attr('value').length > 0) return;

I am sure it's obvious, but what I am doing is checking the actual value attribute of the field at page load (rather than what is currently entered in the field). Now, if it's already populated (like Email New User does), it won't remove the password. This change means I can actually remove this hooked method entirely:

https://github.com/adrianbj/EmailNewUser/blob/a93ea9d73ef523f1abd19135516edd80ac4ebf37/EmailNewUser.module#L63-L65

Would you mind checking at your end to see if everything works as expected. If it does, I'll see if I can get Ryan to make that change.

@Torsten Baldes - could you please try this approach too please - I really need to revert your recent change ASAP as it's breaking things. Thanks!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, adrian said:

This change means I can actually remove this hooked method entirely:

https://github.com/adrianbj/EmailNewUser/blob/a93ea9d73ef523f1abd19135516edd80ac4ebf37/EmailNewUser.module#L63-L65

Would you mind checking at your end to see if everything works as expected.

If the hook is removed then it will fix the issue I was seeing, because with the autocomplete attribute being on the password fields those fields aren't autofilled by Chrome.

So if the extra condition you added to the JS prevents your generated password from being cleared and you can therefore remove the hook then it will be all good from my end. I guess if/when Firefox autofills the password field it doesn't affect the value attribute? I can't test it here because I can't get Firefox to autofill the password field anyway (or I just don't know what steps are required to reproduce the issue on that browser).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Robin S said:

I guess if/when Firefox autofills the password field it doesn't affect the value attribute?

From what I can see, the value attribute is not populated by autocomplete in any browser. Keep in mind that val() and attr('value') are very different things. 

Hopefully Ryan will see this: https://github.com/processwire/processwire-issues/issues/537#issuecomment-383411262 and be happy to implement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22.4.2018 at 8:54 PM, adrian said:

@Torsten Baldes - could you please try this approach too please - I really need to revert your recent change ASAP as it's breaking things. Thanks!

@adrian Sorry I just saw this. If it breaks something revert it. Seems to work for me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Robin S, @Torsten Baldes and everyone else.

Ryan has just implemented my suggestion for that snippet of JS which means that I can now remove the autocomplete removal hack from this module.

Please update your PW core and this module and let me know if you find any further issues.

Thanks!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By MoritzLost
      This is a new module that provides a simple solution to clearing all your cache layers at once, and an extensible interface to perform various cache-related actions.
      The simple motivation behind this module was that I was tired of manually clearing caches in several places after deploying a change on a live site. The basic purpose of this module is a simple Clear all caches link in the Setup menu which clears out all caches, no matter where they hide. You can customize what exactly the module does through it's configuration menu:
      Expire or delete all cache entries in the database, or selectively clear caches by namespace ($cache API) Clear the the template render cache. Clear out specific folders inside your site's cache directory (/site/assets/cache) Refresh version strings for static assets to bust client-side browser caches (this requires some setup, see the full documentation for details). This is the basic function of the module. However, you can also add different cache management action through the API and execute them through the module's interface. For this advanced usage, the module provides:
      An interface to see all available cache actions and execute them. A system log and logging output on the module page to see verify what the module is doing. A CacheControlTools class with utility functions to clear out different caches. An API to add cache actions, execute them programmatically and even modify the default action. Permission management, allowing you granular control over which user roles can execute which actions. The complete documentation can be found in the module's README.
      Beta release
      Note that I consider this a Beta release. Since the module is relatively aggressive in deleting some caches, I would advise you to install in on a test environment before using it on a live site.
      Let me know if you're getting any errors, have trouble using the module or if you have suggestions for improvement!
      In particular, can someone let me know if this module causes any problems with the ProCache module? I don't own or use it, so I can't check. As far as I can tell, ProCache uses a folder inside the cache directory to cache static pages, so my module should be able to clear the ProCache site cache as well, I'd appreciate it if someone can test that for me.
      Future plans
      If there is some interest in this, I plan to expand this to a more general cache management solution. I particular, I would like to add additional cache actions. Some ideas that came to mind:
      Warming up the template render cache for publicly accessible pages. Removing all active user sessions. Let me know if you have more suggestions!
      Links
      https://github.com/MoritzLost/ProcessCacheControl ProcessCacheControl in the Module directory

    • By joshua
      This module is (yet another) way for implementing a cookie management solution.
      Of course there are several other possibilities:
      - https://processwire.com/talk/topic/22920-klaro-cookie-consent-manager/
      - https://github.com/webmanufaktur/CookieManagementBanner
      - https://github.com/johannesdachsel/cookiemonster
      - https://www.oiljs.org/
      - ... and so on ...
      In this module you can configure which kind of cookie categories you want to manage:

      You can also enable the support for respecting the Do-Not-Track (DNT) header to don't annoy users, who already decided for all their browsing experience.
      Currently there are four possible cookie groups:
      - Necessary (always enabled)
      - Statistics
      - Marketing
      - External Media
      All groups can be renamed, so feel free to use other cookie group names. I just haven't found a way to implement a "repeater like" field as configurable module field ...
      When you want to load specific scripts ( like Google Analytics, Google Maps, ...) only after the user's content to this specific category of cookies, just use the following script syntax:
      <script type="optin" data-type="text/javascript" data-category="statistics" data-src="/path/to/your/statistic/script.js"></script> <script type="optin" data-type="text/javascript" data-category="marketing" data-src="/path/to/your/mareketing/script.js"></script> <script type="optin" data-type="text/javascript" data-category="external_media" data-src="/path/to/your/external-media/script.js"></script> <script type="optin" data-type="text/javascript" data-category="marketing">console.log("Inline scripts are also working!");</script> The type has to be "optin" to get recognized by PrivacyWire, the data-attributes are giving hints, how the script shall be loaded, if the data-category is within the cookie consents of the user. These scripts are loaded asynchronously after the user made the decision.
      If you want to give the users the possibility to change their consent, you can use the following Textformatter:
      [[privacywire-choose-cookies]] It's planned to add also other Textformatters to opt-out of specific cookie groups or delete the whole consent cookie.
      You can also add a custom link to output the banner again with a link / button with following class:
      <a href="#" class="privacywire-show-options">Show Cookie Options</a> <button class="privacywire-show-options">Show Cookie Options</button> This module is still in development, but we already use it on several production websites.
      You find it here: https://github.com/blaueQuelle/privacywire/tree/master
      Download: https://github.com/blaueQuelle/privacywire/archive/master.zip
      I would love to hear your feedback 🙂
      Edit: Updated URLs to master tree of git repo
       
    • By David Karich
      Admin Page Tree Multiple Sorting
      ClassName: ProcessPageListMultipleSorting
      Extend the ordinary sort of children of a template in the admin page tree with multiple properties. For each template, you can define your own rule. Write each template (template-name) in a row, followed by a colon and then the additional field names for sorting.
      Example: All children of the template "blog" to be sorted in descending order according to the date of creation, then descending by modification date, and then by title. Type:
      blog: -created, -modified, title  Installation
      Copy the files for this module to /site/modules/ProcessPageListMultipleSorting/ In admin: Modules > Check for new modules. Install Module "Admin Page Tree Multible Sorting". Alternative in ProcessWire 2.4+
      Login to ProcessWire backend and go to Modules Click tab "New" and enter Module Class Name: "ProcessPageListMultipleSorting" Click "Download and Install"   Compatibility   I have currently tested the module only under PW 2.6+, but think that it works on older versions too. Maybe someone can give a feedback.     Download   PW-Repo: http://modules.processwire.com/modules/process-page-list-multiple-sorting/ GitHub: https://github.com/FlipZoomMedia/Processwire-ProcessPageListMultipleSorting     I hope someone can use the module. Have fun and best regards, David
    • By dimitrios
      Hello,
      this module can publish content of a Processwire page on a Facebook page, triggered by saving the Processwire page.
      To set it up, configure the module with a Facebook app ID, secret and a Page ID. Following is additional configuration on Facebook for developers:
      Minimum Required Facebook App configuration:
      on Settings -> Basics, provide the App Domains, provide the Site URL, on Settings -> Advanced, set the API version (has been tested up to v3.3), add Product: Facebook Login, on Facebook Login -> Settings, set Client OAuth Login: Yes, set Web OAuth Login: Yes, set Enforce HTTPS: Yes, add "https://www.example.com/processwire/page/" to field Valid OAuth Redirect URIs. This module is configurable as follows:
      Templates: posts can take place only for pages with the defined templates. On/Off switch: specify a checkbox field that will not allow the post if checked. Specify a message and/or an image for the post.
      Usage
      edit the desired PW page and save; it will post right after the initial Facebook log in and permission granting. After that, an access token is kept.
       
      Download
      PW module directory: http://modules.processwire.com/modules/auto-fb-post/ Github: https://github.com/kastrind/AutoFbPost   Note: Facebook SDK for PHP is utilized.


×
×
  • Create New...