I'm trying to create new member programaticaly.
In fact I need to build a function to import members from a spreadsheet.
I build a Member class which inherits ProfileBase and can create one member programaticaly when he registers but that requires he logs in to update full profile.
So a member registers, his membership is created, I log him in, create his profile and log him out. This is not visible for the user but works well in the background.
Now I need to to import members through a feature in the umbraco back office.
I am able to create members but I am unable to update their profiles which use custom properties set up in web.config, umbraco and my Member class. I just get empty profile in my database.
Any idea what I can do in this case? How I can update a member profile without logging the member in?
Thank you
I did something very similar myself recently, assuming your Member class looks something like the following (or at least does the same thing).
public class MemberProfile : ProfileBase
{
#region Firstname
private const string FIRSTNAME = "_firstname";
[SettingsAllowAnonymous(false)]
public string FirstName
{
get
{
return GetCustomProperty(FIRSTNAME);
}
set
{
SetCustomProperty(FIRSTNAME, value);
}
}
#endregion
#region Get and Set base properties
private string GetCustomProperty(string propertyName)
{
var retVal = "";
var prop = base.GetPropertyValue(propertyName);
if (prop != null)
{
retVal = prop.ToString();
}
return retVal;
}
private void SetCustomProperty(string propertyName, object value)
{
var prop = base[propertyName];
if (prop != null)
{
base.SetPropertyValue(propertyName, value);
}
}
#endregion
}
Then using the following method should allow you to retrieve a member, update a property and save them:
var existingMember = MemberProfile.Create(username) as MemberProfile;
existingMember.FirstName = firstName;
existingMember.Save();
The confusing bit is that the Create() method actually returns existing users, they just called it create for some reason...
Related
My goal is to check if user is member of specific active directory group.
In .net mvc i was using this code inside my service
HttpContext.Current.Request.LogonUserIdentity.Groups
.Any(x => x.Translate(typeof(NTAccount)).Value == "some role"
and it worked well.
In .net core mvc 2.1.2 i pass IHttpContextAccessor into service constructor and try to use following
_httpAccessor.HttpContext.User.Identity.LogonUserIdentity.Groups
but there is an issue, because Identity does not contains LogonUserIdentity. I tried to find any solution but i was not successful, how can i get the list of user groups or check if user is member of specific one ?
Except using built-in function which check the permission by "Roles", if you want to check by specific AD Group, you can also use below codes :
public static class Security
{
public static bool IsInGroup(this ClaimsPrincipal User, string GroupName)
{
var groups = new List<string>();
var wi = (WindowsIdentity)User.Identity;
if (wi.Groups != null)
{
foreach (var group in wi.Groups)
{
try
{
groups.Add(group.Translate(typeof(NTAccount)).ToString());
}
catch (Exception)
{
// ignored
}
}
return groups.Contains(GroupName);
}
return false;
}
}
And using as:
if (User.IsInGroup("GroupName"))
{
}
I've added a couple of custom fields to my ApplicationUser:
public class ApplicationUser : IdentityUser
{
public enum BUserType {IndividualBuyer, IndividualSeller, Broker, Admin};
public string DisplayName;
public BUserType UserType;
I've updated all the views and controllers and I can create new users through my web app. Great.
However, my database seed function doesn't add the new fields to my users. For example, if I create a new user in my initializer, the new fields aren't filled in.
public class ListingInitializer : System.Data.Entity.DropCreateDatabaseAlways<ApplicationDbContext>
{
protected override void Seed(ApplicationDbContext context)
{
var userStore = new UserStore<ApplicationUser>(context);
var userManager = new UserManager<ApplicationUser>(userStore);
if (!(context.Users.Any(u => u.UserName == "arnold#pizzashop.com")))
{
var userToInsert = new ApplicationUser { UserName = "arnold#pizzashop.com", DisplayName = "Arnold Toughguy", UserType = ApplicationUser.BUserType.IndividualSeller };
userManager.Create(userToInsert, "password1234");
}
So my question is, what could be wrong here? I assume userManager.Create does some fancy reflection-to-linq voodoo to find all the fields to persist. Is this not the case? Do I have to add bindings somewhere?
Just a thought, can you just try once after moving the enum definition outside of your POCO class, though I am not absolutely sure that the same will solve your problem.
You can also refer to this video, which may help you somewhat: http://thedatafarm.com/data-access/video-entity-framework-5-enums-and-moving-solution-from-ef-4-3/.
I am in the early stages of developing a new module.
Much of it is laid out in terms of the models etc. Also have the migrations all set up and my database now has the tables for my module.
I am encountering the following error when calling ContentManager.New<myPart> and would like some help please.
Error is this:
An unhandled exception has occurred and the request was terminated. Please refresh the page. If the error persists, go back
Specified cast is not valid.
System.InvalidCastException: Specified cast is not valid.
at Orchard.ContentManagement.ContentCreateExtensions.New[T]
(IContentManager manager, String contentType)
The chunk of code that fires the exception is this:
public static T New<T>(this IContentManager manager, string contentType) where T : class, IContent {
var contentItem = manager.New(contentType);
if (contentItem == null)
return null;
var part = contentItem.Get<T>();
if (part == null)
throw new InvalidCastException();
return part;
}
Here are the various parts to my module that are related to the operation i am struggling with:
ContentPart
public class GoogleMapsSettingsPart : ContentPart<GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord>
{
public string ApiKey {
get { return Record.ApiKey; }
set { Record.ApiKey = value; }
}
}
ContentPartRecord
public class GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord : ContentPartRecord
{
public virtual string ApiKey { get; set; }
}
Handler
public GoogleMapsSettingsPartHandler(IRepository<GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord> repository)
{
Filters.Add(StorageFilter.For(repository));
}
Migration for this table
// Settings Table
SchemaBuilder.CreateTable("GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord", table => table
.ContentPartRecord()
.Column("ApiKey", DbType.String, c => c.WithLength(60))
);
Some of the code from the controller for this model etc
public AdminController(IContentManager contentManager, IShapeFactory shapeFactory, IServiceLocatorService serviceLocatorService, INotifier notifier)
{
_contentManager = contentManager;
_serviceLocatorService = serviceLocatorService;
_notifier = notifier;
Shape = shapeFactory;
T = NullLocalizer.Instance;
}
/// <summary>
/// Display Settings
/// </summary>
/// <returns></returns>
public ActionResult Settings()
{
var settings = _serviceLocatorService.GoogleMapsSettings;
var editor = CreateSettingsEditor(settings);
var model = _services.ContentManager.BuildEditor(settings);
return View((object)model);
}
Finally - the Services where my call throws this exception
private GoogleMapsSettingsPart _settings;
public GoogleMapsSettingsPart GoogleMapsSettings
{
get {
if (_settings == null)
{
_settings = _contentManager.Query<GoogleMapsSettingsPart, GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord>().List().FirstOrDefault();
if (_settings == null)
{
_settings = _contentManager.New<GoogleMapsSettingsPart>("GoogleMapsSettings");
}
}
return _settings;
}
}
The actual line where the exception happens is _settings = _contentManager.New<GoogleMapsSettingsPart>("GoogleMapsSettings");
I have tried all sorts of stuff in place of "GoogleMapsSettings" though nothing is working.
I'm pretty sure at this point it's something simple, though it's avoiding me..My limited knowledge of Orchard is stumping me
Any help would be appreciated :)
The exception is thrown because your content type does not have the part you specified to get.
_contentManager.New<GoogleMapsSettingsPart>("GoogleMapsSettings");
This method call creates a new content item of type GoogleMapSettings and gets the content item as a GoogleMapsSettingsPart. However, it seems that GoogleMapSettings content type does not have a GoogleMapsSettingsPart. That's why the exception gets thrown here.
var part = contentItem.Get<T>();
if (part == null)
throw new InvalidCastException();
You must either attach the part dynamically to your content type or do it in a migration (or manually in the admin, but that's not a good idea). Your migration should look like this.
this.ContentDefinitionManager.AlterTypeDefinition("GoogleMapsSettings",
alt => alt
.WithPart("GoogleMapsSettingsPart");
Ok, so I fixed it...
My understanding of how Orchard works is still very much in the learning stages.
for this particular operation I didn't want to have a content type in the admin - though not sure why after adding the ContentType it still didn't work...
anyway, adding the lines below to my handler took care of the rest. I believe it's actually creating a temporary type so one isn't needed in the system.
public GoogleMapsSettingsPartHandler(IRepository<GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord> repository)
{
Filters.Add(new ActivatingFilter<GoogleMapsSettingsPart>("GoogleMapsSettings"));
Filters.Add(StorageFilter.For(repository));
Filters.Add(new TemplateFilterForRecord<GoogleMapsSettingsPartRecord>("GoogleMapsSettings", "Parts/GoogleMapsSettings"));
}
I'v got the same error, but in my case it was everything ok with migration class.
The reason was unlucky merge, which deleted my driver class of my part.
Just look at this code of Activating method of ContentPartDriverCoordinator class. In my case there was no partInfo for my content part and resulted part became ContentPart, so casting throws an exception
var partInfos = _drivers.SelectMany(cpp => cpp.GetPartInfo()).ToList();
foreach (var typePartDefinition in contentTypeDefinition.Parts) {
var partName = typePartDefinition.PartDefinition.Name;
var partInfo = partInfos.FirstOrDefault(pi => pi.PartName == partName);
var part = partInfo != null
? partInfo.Factory(typePartDefinition)
: new ContentPart { TypePartDefinition = typePartDefinition };
context.Builder.Weld(part);
}
I have a method which looks like the one below
public List<Rajnikanth> GetRajnis()
{
string username = Utility.Helpers.GetLoggedInUserName();
return _service.GetRajni(username);
}
Utility.Helper is a static class,
public static class Helpers
{
public static String GetLoggedInUserName()
{
string username = "";
if (System.Web.HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated)
{
username = ((System.Web.Security.FormsIdentity)HttpContext.Current.User.Identity).Ticket.Name;
}
return username;
}
}
I want to test : GetRajnis()
I want to mock : GetLoggedInUserName()
So my test method looks something like...
[TestMethod]
public void TestGetRajnis()
{
SomeController s = new SomeController(new SomeService());
var data = s.GetRajnis();
Assert.IsNotNull(data);
}
how do I mock the static method GetLoggedInUserName() ?
The Simplest Approach: Override the return value
If you are looking to mock a return value, then this is very simple. You can modify the Utility.Helper class to include a property called OverrideLoggedInUserName. When someone calls GetLogedInUserName(), if the override property is set, it is returned, otherwise the normal code to get the value from the HttpContext is used to get the return value.
public static class Helper
{
// Set this value to override the return value of GetLoggedInUserName().
public static string OverrideLoggedInUserName { get; set; };
public static string GetLoggedInUserName()
{
// Return mocked value if one is specified.
if ( !string.IsNullOrEmpty( OverrideLoggedInUserName ) )
return OverrideLoggedInUserName;
// Normal implementation.
string username = "";
if ( System.Web.HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated )
{
username = ( (System.Web.Security.FormsIdentity)HttpContext.Current.User.Identity ).Ticket.Name;
}
return username;
}
}
This will effectively allow you to override the return value, which technically isn't a mock--it's a stub (according to the excellent article Mocks Aren't Stubs by Martin Fowler). This allows you to stub a return value, but won't allow you to assert whether the method was called or not. Anyhow as long as you only want to manipulate the return value this works fine.
Here is how you would use this in a test.
[ TestMethod ]
public void TestGetRajnis()
{
// Set logged in user name to be "Bob".
Helper.OverrideLoggedInUserName = "Bob";
SomeController s = new SomeController( new SomeService() );
var data = s.GetRajnis();
// Any assertions...
}
This design does have one drawback. Because it's a static class, if you set the override value, it remains set until you un-set it. So you must remember to re-set it to null.
A Better Approach: Inject the dependency
A better approach may be to create a class that retrieves the logged in user name, and pass it into the constructor of SomeController. We call this dependency injection. This way, you can inject a mocked instance into it for testing, but pass the real instance (that gets the user from the HttpContext) when not testing. This is a much cleaner and clearer approach. Plus, you can leverage all the power of whatever mocking framework you are using, since they are designed specifically to handle this approach. Here is what that would look like.
// Define interface to get the logged in user name.
public interface ILoggedInUserInfo
{
string GetLoggedInUserName();
}
// Implementation that gets logged in user name from HttpContext.
// This class will be used in production code.
public class LoggedInUserInfo : ILoggedInUserInfo
{
public string GetLoggedInUserName()
{
// This is the same code you had in your example.
string username = "";
if ( System.Web.HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated )
{
username = ( (System.Web.Security.FormsIdentity)HttpContext.Current.User.Identity ).Ticket.Name;
}
return username;
}
}
// This controller uses the ILoggedInUserInfo interface
// to get the logged in user name.
public class SomeController
{
private SomeService _service;
private ILoggedInUserInfo _userInfo;
// Constructor allows you inject an object that tells it
// how to get the logged in user info.
public SomeController( SomeService service, ILoggedInUserInfo userInfo )
{
_service = service;
_userInfo = userInfo;
}
public List< Rajnikanth > GetRajnis()
{
// Use the injected object to get the logged in user name.
string username = _userInfo.GetLoggedInUserName();
return _service.GetRajni( username );
}
}
And here is a test using Rhino Mocks to inject a stub object into the controller.
[ TestMethod ]
public void TestGetRajnis()
{
// Create a stub that returns "Bob" as the current logged in user name.
// This code uses Rhino Mocks mocking framework...
var userInfo = MockRepository.GenerateStub< ILoggedInUserInfo >();
userInfo.Stub( x => x.GetLoggedInUserName() ).Return( "Bob" );
SomeController s = new SomeController( new SomeService(), userInfo );
var data = s.GetRajnis();
// Any assertions...
}
The disadvantage here is that you can't just call Helper.GetLoggedInUserName() from anywhere in your code, because it's no longer static. However, you no longer have the need to reset the stubbed username every time you finish a test. Because it's not static, it it automatically reset. You just recreate it for the next test and set a new return value.
I hope this helps.
Get rid of the static class if you are looking for testability. A simple fix for now would be to create a wrapper around the static class. Unless you use something like TypeMock or something equally as powerful, then you cannot alter the logic of a static class. Nor do I suggest it. If you have to stub a static class, it probably should not be a static class.
public class StaticWrapper
{
public virtual String GetLoggedInUserName()
{
Utility.Helpers.GetLoggedInUserName();
}
}
I am working on an inherited application which makes use of NInject and nHibernate as part of an ASP.NET MVC (C#) application. Currently, I'm looking at a problem with the auditing of modifications. Each entity has ChangedOn/ChangedBy and CreatedOn/CreatedBy fields, which are mapped to database columns. However, these either get filled with the wrong username or no username at all. I think this is because it has been configured in the wrong way, but I don't know enough about nHibernate and NInject to solve the issue, so I hope someone can help. Below some code snippets to hopefully provide sufficient insight in the application.
Creating the session factory and session:
public class NHibernateModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<ISessionFactory>().ToProvider(new SessionFactoryProvider()).InSingletonScope();
Bind<ISession>().ToProvider(new SessionProvider()).InRequestScope();
Bind<INHibernateUnitOfWork>().To<NHibernateUnitOfWork>().InRequestScope();
Bind<User>().ToProvider(new UserProvider()).InRequestScope();
Bind<IStamper>().ToProvider(new StamperProvider()).InRequestScope();
}
}
public class SessionProvider : Provider<ISession>
{
protected override ISession CreateInstance(IContext context)
{
// Create session
var sessionFactory = context.Kernel.Get<ISessionFactory>();
var session = sessionFactory.OpenSession();
session.FlushMode = FlushMode.Commit;
return session;
}
}
public class SessionFactoryProvider : Provider<ISessionFactory>
{
protected override ISessionFactory CreateInstance(IContext context)
{
var connectionString = ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["DefaultConnectionString"].ToString();
var stamper = context.Kernel.Get<IStamper>();
return NHibernateHelper.CreateSessionFactory(connectionString, stamper);
}
}
public class StamperProvider : Provider<IStamper>
{
protected override IStamper CreateInstance(IContext context)
{
System.Security.Principal.IPrincipal user = HttpContext.Current.User;
System.Security.Principal.IIdentity identity = user == null ? null : user.Identity;
string name = identity == null ? "Unknown" : identity.Name;
return new Stamper(name);
}
}
public class UserProvider : Provider<User>
{
protected override UserCreateInstance(IContext context)
{
var userRepos = context.Kernel.Get<IUserRepository>();
System.Security.Principal.IPrincipal user = HttpContext.Current.User;
System.Security.Principal.IIdentity identity = user == null ? null : user.Identity;
string name = identity == null ? "" : identity.Name;
var user = userRepos.GetByName(name);
return user;
}
}
Configuring the session factory:
public static ISessionFactory CreateSessionFactory(string connectionString, IStamper stamper)
{
// Info: http://wiki.fluentnhibernate.org/Fluent_configuration
return Fluently.Configure()
.Database(MsSqlConfiguration.MsSql2008
.ConnectionString(connectionString))
.Mappings(m =>
{
m.FluentMappings
.Conventions.Add(PrimaryKey.Name.Is(x => "Id"))
.AddFromAssemblyOf<NHibernateHelper>();
m.HbmMappings.AddFromAssemblyOf<NHibernateHelper>();
})
// Register
.ExposeConfiguration(c => {
c.EventListeners.PreInsertEventListeners =
new IPreInsertEventListener[] { new EventListener(stamper) };
c.EventListeners.PreUpdateEventListeners =
new IPreUpdateEventListener[] { new EventListener(stamper) };
})
.BuildSessionFactory();
}
Snippet from the eventlistener:
public bool OnPreInsert(PreInsertEvent e)
{
_stamper.Insert(e.Entity as IStampedEntity, e.State, e.Persister);
return false;
}
As you can see the session factory is in a singleton scope. Therefore the eventlistener and stamper also get instantiated in this scope (I think). And this means that when the user is not yet logged in, the username in the stamper is set to an empty string or "Unknown".
I tried to compensate for this problem, by modifying the Stamper. It checks if the username is null or empty. If this is true, it tries to find the active user, and fill the username-property with that user's name:
private string GetUserName()
{
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_userName))
{
var user = ServiceLocator.Resolve<User>();
if (user != null)
{
_userName = user.UserName;
}
}
return _userName;
}
But this results in a completely different user's name, which is also logged in to the application, being logged in the database. My guess this is because it resolves the wrong active user, being the last user logged in, instead of the user that started the transaction.
The offending parts are here:
Bind<ISessionFactory>().
.ToProvider(new SessionFactoryProvider())
.InSingletonScope();
Bind<IStamper>()
.ToProvider(new StamperProvider())
.InRequestScope();
And later on:
public class SessionFactoryProvider : Provider<ISessionFactory>
{
protected override ISessionFactory CreateInstance(IContext context)
{
// Unimportant lines omitted
var stamper = context.Kernel.Get<IStamper>();
return NHibernateHelper.CreateSessionFactory(connectionString, stamper);
}
}
public class StamperProvider : Provider<IStamper>
{
protected override IStamper CreateInstance(IContext context)
{
// Unimportant lines omitted
string name = /* whatever */
return new Stamper(name);
}
}
Let's analyze what's going on with the code:
The ISessionFactory is bound as single-instance. There will only ever be one throughout the lifetime of the process. This is fairly typical.
The ISessionFactory is initialized with SessionFactoryProvider which immediately goes out to get an instance of IStamper, and passes this as a constant argument to initialize the session factory.
The IStamper in turn is initialized by the StamperProvider which initializes a Stamper class with a constant name set to the current user principal/identity.
The net result of this is that as long as the process is alive, every single "stamp" will be assigned the name of whichever user was first to log in. This might even be the anonymous user, which explains why you're seeing so many blank entries.
Whoever wrote this only got half the equation right. The IStamper is bound to the request scope, but it's being supplied to a singleton, which means that only one IStamper will ever be created. You're lucky that the Stamper doesn't hold any resources or have any finalizers, otherwise you'd probably end up with a lot of ObjectDisposedException and other weird errors.
There are three possible solutions to this:
(Recommended) - Rewrite the Stamper class to look up the current user on each call, instead of being initialized with static user info. Afterward, the Stamper class would no longer take any constructor arguments. You can the bind the IStamper InSingletonScope instead of InRequestScope.
Create an abstract IStamperFactory with a GetStamper method, and a concrete StamperFactory which implements it by wrapping the IKernel instance. Bind these together InSingletonScope. Have your concrete factory return kernel.Get<IStamper>(). Modify the session factory to accept and hold an IStamperFactory instead of an IStamper. Each time it needs to stamp, use the factory to get a new IStamper instance.
Change the ISessionFactory to be InRequestScope. Not recommended because it will hurt performance and potentially mess up ID generators if you don't use DB-generated identities, but it will solve your auditing problem.
Aaronaught, you're analysis describes exactly what I suspected. However, I found there is a fourth solution which is easier and more straightforward IMHO.
I modified the sessionprovider, such that the call to OpenSession takes an instance of IInterceptor as argument. As it turns out, the event listeners aren't actually supposed to be used for auditing (a bit of a rant, but other than that he is right, according to Fabio as well).
The AuditInterceptor implements OnFlushDirty (for auditing existing entities) and OnSave (for auditing newly created entities). The SessionProvider looks as below:
public class SessionProvider : Provider<ISession>
{
protected override ISession CreateInstance(IContext context)
{
// Create session
System.Security.Principal.IPrincipal user = HttpContext.Current.User;
System.Security.Principal.IIdentity identity = user == null ? null : user.Identity;
string name = identity == null ? "" : identity.Name;
var sessionFactory = context.Kernel.Get<ISessionFactory>();
var session = sessionFactory.OpenSession(new AuditInterceptor(name));
session.FlushMode = FlushMode.Commit;
return session;
}
}