REST usergroups/id/users endpoint filtering inactive users

I've been working on some tooling to synchronize some of our Active Directory usergroups with Jama Org/Project groups via the REST API.
I've noticed in testing, that when I fetch a list of users with usergroup/id/users for a given group, the list returned excludes any members that are marked as inactive, yet when I view the same usergroup via the Admin / User Groups page, inactive users are listed.
Is there a way to have the endpoint include ALL users in the group regardless of status?

Comments

  • Hi Mark,

    I just checked in with a colleague who has been working on the development of the API. He said he doubts that we will change the endpoint so that inactive members are returned; he thinks that the UI is in error by showing inactive members of the group. (We will file a bug for the latter.)
  • Just to follow through on this, Mark: the REST API's behavior is working as designed, but the UI's is not. For the UI discrepancy we have filed a bug, SOS-DEF-1797.
  • Jess Ostrowski
    Jess Ostrowski Member, Data Exchange Posts: 2
    edited March 2023

    Mark,
    Did you ever resolve this question, or come up with another solution in replace of it? 


    ------------------------------
    Katie Wright
    Collins Aerospace
    IA
    ------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------
    Original Message:
    Sent: 04-10-2017 08:20
    From: Mark Montminy
    Subject: REST usergroups/id/users endpoint filtering inactive users

    I've been working on some tooling to synchronize some of our Active Directory usergroups with Jama Org/Project groups via the REST API.
    I've noticed in testing, that when I fetch a list of users with usergroup/id/users for a given group, the list returned excludes any members that are marked as inactive, yet when I view the same usergroup via the Admin / User Groups page, inactive users are listed.
    Is there a way to have the endpoint include ALL users in the group regardless of status?

    ------------------------------
    Mark Montminy
    ------------------------------
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 152
    edited March 2023

    Hi Jess, 

    In the case outlined by Mark, and the resulting investigation re: SOS-DEF-1797, the issue was determined to be an inconsistency in what admins could see through the API vs in the UI, and not a defect in the traditional sense.

    That said, there is an idea card regarding this topic and I'd recommend voting on it (along with adding any additional context/usage cases you may have) if you haven't already; it'd be the best way to share your thoughts here with our Product team. In the meantime, due to the age of this thread, I'll go ahead and close it.

    ------------------------------
    Carly Rossi // she/her
    Community Manager // Jama Software
    Portland, OR
    ------------------------------
    -------------------------------------------
    Original Message:
    Sent: 03-30-2023 14:04
    From: Jess Ostrowski
    Subject: REST usergroups/id/users endpoint filtering inactive users

    Mark,
    Did you ever resolve this question, or come up with another solution in replace of it? 


    ------------------------------
    Katie Wright
    Collins Aerospace
    IA
    ------------------------------

    Original Message:
    Sent: 04-10-2017 08:20
    From: Mark Montminy
    Subject: REST usergroups/id/users endpoint filtering inactive users

    I've been working on some tooling to synchronize some of our Active Directory usergroups with Jama Org/Project groups via the REST API.
    I've noticed in testing, that when I fetch a list of users with usergroup/id/users for a given group, the list returned excludes any members that are marked as inactive, yet when I view the same usergroup via the Admin / User Groups page, inactive users are listed.
    Is there a way to have the endpoint include ALL users in the group regardless of status?

    ------------------------------
    Mark Montminy
    ------------------------------
This discussion has been closed.