Closed Xyene closed 5 years ago
Heh. I did the same, about 21 hours go. Hilarious coincidence. I only dropped 5 users or so though.
I wholeheartedly agree that the command looks "safe" to run, but apparently wasn't.
@Xyene @wdoekes really sorry about the data loss. It seems like we dropped in the user.is_active
check in an oversight in https://github.com/macropin/django-registration/issues/233 and https://github.com/macropin/django-registration/pull/308. Originally we dropped the check in favor having an inactive registration profile, however from your report i think it's clear we should check all three values. will put up a PR and release to pypi shortly, really sorry about this!
released versions 2.5
and 1.11
to pypi, going to close this for now!
https://pypi.org/project/django-registration-redux/1.11/ https://pypi.org/project/django-registration-redux/2.5
Thanks for the quick fix :)
We recently ran
cleanupregistration
on a production instance for the first time in several years, and were unpleasantly surprised when the command dropped several thousand users which had been manually activated (or programatically created).The check on https://github.com/macropin/django-registration/blob/master/registration/models.py#L274 doesn't check whether the user's
is_active
field is set to true, which has been the standard practice our staff has been using to manually activate accounts where the user did not receive the confirmation email.Is there a particular use-case where adding a check for the user's
is_active
field is undesirable? If not, we would be happy to send in a PR to address this -- certainly dropping thousands of "active" users was not ideal in our case.