You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Bug: Some names don't appear in "Created by" filter in Tracker #7819
I tried filtering using “Created by” and searching for my name, but I don’t appear on the list (I don’t appear anywhere on the list even when not using search). This is the same whether I’m in “All issues” or within a project.
Checked on a current Platform-Collective build (model 0.7.428), and all creators in the tested issues were available. Platform-Collective PR Platform-Collective/platform#76, which fixes upstream #8670, adds filter entries for author IDs without matching SocialIdentity records; this may address this report where the cause is the same. That relationship does not establish coverage for every missing-person case. If maintainers agree that the original case is covered, please consider closing this issue.
@AbigailDawson — based on the check described above, this looks resolved in the current code. Could you please close this issue if you agree? If you think it is not fixed yet, please describe what still goes wrong (steps, expected vs. actual behaviour), so it can be looked at again.
Activity
huly-github-staging commentedon Jan 29, 2025
Connected to Huly®: UBERF-9281
MichaelUray commentedon Oct 20, 2026
Checked on a current Platform-Collective build (model 0.7.428), and all creators in the tested issues were available. Platform-Collective PR Platform-Collective/platform#76, which fixes upstream #8670, adds filter entries for author IDs without matching SocialIdentity records; this may address this report where the cause is the same. That relationship does not establish coverage for every missing-person case. If maintainers agree that the original case is covered, please consider closing this issue.
MichaelUray commentedon Oct 20, 2026
@AbigailDawson — based on the check described above, this looks resolved in the current code. Could you please close this issue if you agree? If you think it is not fixed yet, please describe what still goes wrong (steps, expected vs. actual behaviour), so it can be looked at again.