Jump to content
adrian

Email New User

Recommended Posts

I catch emails with Tracy´s mail interceptor, but no email is there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 bernhard
      --- Please use RockFinder3 ---
    • By MoritzLost
      Cacheable Placeholders
      This module allows you to have pieces of dynamic content inside cached output. This aims to solve the common problem of having a mostly cacheable site, but with pieces of dynamic output here and there.  Consider this simple example, where you want to output a custom greeting to the current user:
      <h1>Good morning, <?= ucfirst($user->name) ?></h1> This snippet means you can't use the template cache (at least for logged-in users), because each user has a different name. Even if 99% of your output is static, you can only cache the pieces that you know won't include this personal greeting. A more common example would be CSRF tokens for HTML forms - those need to be unique by definition, so you can't cache the form wholesale.
      This module solves this problem by introducing cacheable placeholders - small placeholder tokens that get replaced during every request. The replacement is done inside a Page::render hook so it runs during every request, even if the response is served from the template cache. So you can use something like this:
      <h1>Good morning, {{{greeting}}}</h1> Replacement tokens are defined with a callback function that produces the appropriate output and added to the module through a simple hook:
      // site/ready.php wire()->addHookAfter('CachePlaceholders::getTokens', function (HookEvent $e) { $tokens = $e->return; $tokens['greeting'] = [ 'callback' => function (array $tokenData) { return ucfirst(wire('user')->name); } ]; $e->return = $tokens; }); Tokens can also include parameters that are parsed and passed to the callback function. There are more fully annotated examples and step-by-step instructions in the README on Github!
      Features
      A simple and fast token parser that calls the appropriate callback and runs automatically. Tokens may include multiple named or positional parameters, as well as multi-value parameters. A manual mode that allows you to replace tokens in custom pieces of cached content (useful if you're using the $cache API). Some built-in tokens for common use-cases: CSRF-Tokens, replacing values from superglobals and producing random hexadecimal strings. The token format is completely customizable, all delimiters can be changed to avoid collisions with existing tag parsers or template languages. Links
      Github Repository & documentation Module directory (pending approval) If you are interested in learning more, the README is very extensive, with more usage examples, code samples and usage instructions!
    • By Craig
      I've been using Fathom Analytics for a while now and on a growing number of sites, so thought it was about time there was a PW module for it.
      WayFathomAnalytics
      WayFathomAnalytics is a group of modules which will allow you to view your Fathom Analytics dashboard in the PW admin panel and (optionally) automatically add and configure the tracking code on front-end pages.
      Links
      GitHub Readme & documentation Download Zip Modules directory Module settings screenshot What is Fathom Analytics?
      Fathom Analytics is a simple, privacy-focused website analytics tool for bloggers and businesses.

      Stop scrolling through pages of reports and collecting gobs of personal data about your visitors, both of which you probably don't need. Fathom is a simple and private website analytics platform that lets you focus on what's important: your business.
      Privacy focused Fast-loading dashboards, all data is on a single screen Easy to get what you need, no training required Unlimited email reports Private or public dashboard sharing Cookie notices not required (it doesn't use cookies or collect personal data) Displays: top content, top referrers, top goals and more
    • By daniels
      This is a lightweight alternative to other newsletter & newsletter-subscription modules.
      You can find the Module in the Modules directory and on Github
      It can subscribe, update, unsubscribe & delete a user in a list in Mailchimp with MailChimp API 3.0. It does not provide any forms or validation, so you can feel free to use your own. To protect your users, it does not save any user data in logs or sends them to an admin.
      This module fits your needs if you...
      ...use Mailchimp as your newsletter / email-automation tool ...want to let users subscribe to your newsletter on your website ...want to use your own form, validation and messages (with or without the wire forms) ...don't want any personal user data saved in any way in your ProcessWire environment (cf. EU data regulation terms) ...like to subscribe, update, unsubscribe or delete users to/from different lists ...like the Mailchimp UI for creating / sending / reviewing email campaigns *I have only tested it with PHP 7.x so far, so use on owners risk
      EDIT:
      Since 0.0.4, instructions and changelog can be found in the README only. You can find it here  🙂
      If you have questions or like to contribute, just post a reply or create an issue or pr on github, thanks!
    • By MoritzLost
      Sorry for the convoluted title. I have a problem with Process modules that define a custom page using the page key through getModuleInfo (as demonstrated in this excellent tutorial by @bernhard). Those pages are created automatically when the module is installed. The problem is that the title of the page only gets set in the current language. That's not a problem if the current language (language of the superuser who is installing the module) is the default language; if it isn't, the Process page is missing a title in the default language. This has the very awkward effect that a user using the backend in the default language (or any other language) will see an empty entry in the setup menu:

      This screenshot comes from my Cache Control module which includes a Process page. Now I realize the description sounds obscure, but for us it's a common setup: We a multiple bilingual sites where the default language is German and the second language is English. While the clients use the CMS in German, as a developer I prefer the English interface, so whenever I install a Process module I get this problem.
      As a module author, is there a way to handle this situation? I guess it would be possible to use post-installation hooks or create the pages manually, but I very much prefer the declarative approach. The page title is already translatable (through the __ function), but of course at the time of installation there is no translation, and as far as I'm aware it's not possible to ship translations with a module so they are used automatically. Could this situation be handled better in the core? I would prefer if the module installation process would always set the title of the Process page in the default language, instead of the language of the current user.
×
×
  • Create New...