Two doors onto the client seat cap did not ask it. Both update()
methods -- the edit screen and PATCH /api/v1/clients/{id} -- clear
account_requested when a pending client is activated, under a comment
saying that counts as approval, and approval is the moment a seat is
spent. So a managed installation sitting at its cap kept taking clients
on for as long as registrations arrived, and self-registration is open
to strangers, so the supply of pending rows is not the operator's to
control.
Verified rather than taken on trust: the two new door tests were run
against the unguarded controllers and fail there, and every place in
app/ that clears the flag was enumerated to check no third door was
missed. There is none -- the other six already ask, and a conversion
refuses a pending account outright rather than approving it sideways.
The guard sits inside the approval branch, so an installation at its cap
can still rename a client it already holds. That is pinned by a test of
its own.
Conflicted with tonight's seat work in SeatAllowanceTest, which had
added an import beside the one this adds. Resolved by keeping both;
suite green at 2065 and PHPStan clean after resolution.
Reported and fixed by @denkfabrik-li.
On a managed installation with its staff seats full, /users/create opened
as though there were room. You typed a name, an address and a password
you had to invent, pressed Save, and the plan limit came back as a
validation error under the email field -- which reads as a complaint
about the address rather than a fact about the plan.
A full installation is an ordinary state on a plan sold by the seat, so
it is now stated up front. The list carries the seat position, the
button goes dead once the last seat is taken and says why, and the
create screen turns away anyone who reaches it by link or bookmark. The
guard in store() is untouched: that is still the rule, this is only the
door.
The refusal is worded once, in SeatAllowance, and the screen is handed
that sentence rather than writing its own -- two wordings of one limit
is how somebody ends up believing there are two limits. `full` is
derived there too, from the same comparison the guard refuses on, so a
screen cannot disagree with it about the edge (used > limit, after an
operator lowers a limit) and offer a button for a form that cannot be
submitted.
Clients get the same treatment: the cap exists there too, and reached it
the same way. Self-hosted installations have no limit, so they are shown
nothing about one.
SeatAllowance says a cap is only a cap if every door asks, and has a test
per door for that reason. Two doors do not ask.
The moment a seat is spent is the moment `account_requested` is cleared.
Five places do that. approve(), both store()s and ClientProvisioning ask
guardClient(); AccountConversion asks it through guardToClient(). The two
update()s -- web and API -- clear the flag with no guard at all, under a
comment that names exactly what they are doing:
// Activating a pending account through the edit screen counts as
// approval and clears the request flag.
Measured with clients: 0, one pending registration:
POST /account-requests/{id}/approve refused, flag still set
PATCH /clients/{id} active=true approved, clientUsed() 0 -> 1
PATCH /api/v1/clients/{id} active=true approved, clientUsed() 0 -> 1
A managed installation at its cap therefore keeps taking clients on, from
the edit screen or a PATCH, for as long as registrations keep arriving --
and self-registration is open to strangers, so the supply is not the
operator's to control.
Inside the branch, not above it. Above it, an installation sitting at its
cap could not rename a client it already holds, which would trade one
wrong refusal for another. There is a test pinning that.
The field is `active` rather than the default `email`: on this screen the
administrator is toggling `active`, and an error under the email field
would point at the wrong thing. approve() has no form of its own, so it
keeps the default.
Three tests, per door as the file's other eight are. The two door tests
were measured red against the unguarded controllers (2 failed / 18
passed). The third -- that editing an existing client still works at the
cap -- is green either way: it guards against the fix being written a
line too high, not against the bug.
Full suite passes (2051 passed / 2 skipped), PHPStan level 8 clean.
One thing worth knowing that this branch does not touch: on a parallel
run, `UpdateWelcomeTest > staff who may not read...` fails roughly one run
in six on untouched main, with `BindingResolutionException: Target
[Inertia\Ssr\Gateway] is not instantiable`. Measured over 24 baseline runs
before this change existed. It is not this fix, and it is not in scope
here, but it will start being visible as soon as the workflow parses
again.
It read "limited to 1 staff accounts" -- the number sat directly in front
of a countable noun, which is the message a free-tier customer meets the
first time they try to add anybody.
Adding plural forms would fix English and not much else. Polish, Czech and
Russian inflect the noun by the number in front of it, on a three-way split
that a two-form string cannot express, so ':count kont' cannot be right for
every value however many variants it carries. Ending the sentence on the
number means no language has to agree with it -- the same shape the other
counted strings here already use.
Both strings rewritten in all sixteen locales rather than left to the next
translation pass, since the old key would otherwise go missing and block a
build. Checked at 1 and at 25 in English, Spanish, German, Polish and
Russian.
Opening user management on cloud (623ad68) left a managed tenant able to
create staff accounts without limit. This is the other half, and the two
belong in the same release.
max_clients and max_staff_users are numbers the platform sells and does
not enforce — grep finds them only being passed to screens. The
application is the only process that can count against them, so it
accepts the number from the environment and refuses to exceed it. That is
not the same as inventing a plan tier, which is what config/api.php
declines to do when it will not key a rate limit off billing: nothing
here knows what a plan is.
## One definition
staffUsed() and clientUsed() are public and are what the guards read. A
control plane showing "2 of 3 used" from its own query, beside an
application refusing the fourth from a different one, disagrees
eventually — over an inactive account, or a deleted one — and the
disagreement reads as a billing fault rather than a counting one.
## What counts, and the consequences somebody has to explain
An inactive staff account occupies its seat. Excluding it would make
deactivation a way around the cap rather than a way to revoke access,
since reactivating is one click. The cost is an awkward incentive —
deactivating is the safe removal and keeps paying, deleting frees the
seat and asks what happens to the files — and it is better explained than
hidden.
A client awaiting approval does not. Self-registration is open to
strangers, and counting a pending request would let anybody exhaust a
paid limit from the outside, turning a pricing tier into an availability
control. The seat is spent at approval, which is where the guard sits.
A soft-deleted account frees its seat, though not its address —
AvailableEmailRule holds that until erasure. So a seat can be free while
re-adding the same person is still refused, which is the address rule
rather than this one.
## Eight doors, eight tests
There is no single User::create() to guard. StaffAccounts::create()
covers both staff controllers, but a promotion takes a staff seat without
creating anything, a demotion takes a client seat, ClientProvisioning
serves registration and LDAP and social sign-in alike, and approval turns
an uncounted request into a counted client.
A cap is only a cap if every door asks, so there is a test per door and
each was verified to fail without its guard — eight red, with the two
"must not change" cases green either way. DownloadAllowance's shape for
DownloadAllowance's reason: the failure mode is one of them quietly not
asking, invisible from everywhere except the door that forgot.
projectsend:admin is deliberately uncapped and has a test saying so. It
is the recovery path, and anyone who can run it can also edit the
environment the cap comes from.
ignacionelson