- May 25, 2017
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
Passwords will be hashed with the Argon2 library. https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.10/topics/auth/passwords/#using-argon2-with-django Also, new passwords will go through 'common-passwords-checks'. This will prevent access to accounts using one of those common brute force password hackers around, in case of a breach.
-
- May 23, 2017
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
If a certain permission was removed on a Group, it didn't explicity removed the permission from the database. Therefore, removing a permission from the Group in the command didn't have effect on the production area. This could lead unattended permissions on a Group.
-
- May 22, 2017
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jean-Sébastien Caux authored
-
Jean-Sébastien Caux authored
-
Jean-Sébastien Caux authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
- May 21, 2017
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
- May 20, 2017
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
Needed refactoring of submit manuscript flow. Checks are run via the forms. Also, the copying of data from old submissions is done via forms. All this functionality is removed from the model.
-
- May 19, 2017
-
-
Jorran de Wit authored
The removeal of the old ArxivCaller made the submit Manuscript view crash. At least 5 properties of the old caller was relied on but not found on the new caller. Also, (more) important are three checks on the submit manuscript page which are missing now. These should be implemented into the submission form back again.
-
Jorran de Wit authored
Due to the new Commentary request forms, which were also used during vetting (choice=modify), the vetting went wrong sometimes. If the vetting action was 'modify', the user was redirected to the old form which didn't exist anymore. As a result of how the contruction of this modify structure, the Commentary was first deleted and thus the data was lost. The requester did receive a mail that his/her Commentary was accessible on SciPost however. I fixed this by recontructing the vetting views. I combined the vetting list and the vet request. I removed the action removing the Commentary and made this a redirect to a new view which is a modify page accessible only for EdCol Admins to modify+accept the Commentary. Also, the mail for 'modify' vetting is also just sent at *after* modification now.
-
Geert Kapteijns authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-
Jorran de Wit authored
-