Fix the password reset URL.

 






 

 


  Review Request #5961
  —
  Created June 9, 2014 and submitted 

 


















 

  

   Information

  





 
 

  david
 









 
 

  Review Board
 









 
 

  release-2.0.x
 









 
 

  3395
 









 
 

  
 









 
 

  967fe7f...
 






 




 

  

   Reviewers

  





 
 

  reviewboard
 









 
 

  
 






 








 





  


 
 

  
The regex for extracting the token from the password reset URL was incorrect,

which resulted in an error that claimed "The password reset link was invalid,

either because it expired or has already been used."

 








  


 
 

  
Went all the way through the password reset flow successfully.

 







 









 





  








 






 
 
 

  

   

    

     
    

    
    
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
    

   

   

    
     

      Description
      From
      Last Updated
     

    
    



     

      
       
       
Col: 80 E501 line too long (95 > 79 characters)

      		
      
       reviewbotreviewbot
      
      
       
      
     


    
   

  

 







 






  

 








 














 





 

  

   




reviewbot




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
reviewbot


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    This is a review from Review Bot.
  Tool: PEP8 Style Checker
  Processed Files:
    reviewboard/accounts/urls.py
  Ignored Files:


    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      reviewboard/accounts/urls.py
      


       (Diff revision 1)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    Col: 80
 E501 line too long (95 > 79 characters)

    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  3. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  

 
















 





 

  

   




reviewbot




   

   





  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
reviewbot


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    This is a review from Review Bot.
  Tool: Pyflakes
  Processed Files:
    reviewboard/accounts/urls.py
  Ignored Files:


    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 















  2. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  

 
















 





 

  

   




chipx86




   

   





  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
chipx86


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      reviewboard/accounts/urls.py
      


       (Diff revision 1)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    





    
    Looks like the - to / was the main fix. Should we continue doing .+ just to safe-guard against any future changes in these IDs?
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  


    1. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      Actually the / shouldn't matter too much (since it extracts the parameters before calling the view, and we use reverse() to generate the URL). Since this is the regex that's used inside the django code, I'm not too worried about future changes. Perhaps that's naive, since the uidb64 backwards-incompatible change started all of this.
      
 
      

      2. 



    2. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      Let me extract my foot from my mouth and try again.
      

      Yes, the / matters, but it could just as well be something else that's not glommed by the uidb64 parameter. That said, since this is the regex used in django.contrib.auth, I'd rather keep it as-is.
      
 
      

      3. 



    3. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      I'm confused then. How did this break? The .+ should have captured all of that.
      
 
      

      4. 



    4. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      Oh, glommed by the uidb64 parameter. Got it.
      
 
      

      5. 


 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  3. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  

 
















 





 

  

   




chipx86




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
chipx86


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    Ship It!
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 















  2. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   




david




   

   

  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 Review request changed

    
   


  

  

  






 

  Status:
  

  Closed (submitted)

  
 




 
Change Summary:

 
Pushed to release-2.0.x (ebb4cd6)





 


 










  

 









     

    

   

  

  

   
   Loading...