[Ldap] fix refreshUser() ignoring extra_fields #37177
Merged
+11
−1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
chalasr
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2020
Member
|
Thank you @arkste. |
This was referenced Jun 12, 2020
Merged
Merged
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While #31532 introduced
extra_fieldsin general, #32824 later addedLdapUser&LdapUserProviderand ignoredextra_fieldsonrefreshUser().This PR fixes
refreshUser()and adds a test which makes sure, that the refreshed ldap user doesn't lose its default values.