RFC Schema User Account

[PFranciscoRojas]

Hi, guys we want to share the RFC for the User Account.
Here is the PR

Greetings.

[YaelRmz]

Hi! I'm from Data Monitoring team. We need to know when an user is a host, this information is in id_user_type? Or id_user_type is for admin purpose?

[PFranciscoRojas]

Thanks. And about if an user can change between types?

I owe you that answer we still do not have it defined

[jacorreamed]

Hello @PFranciscoRojas It´s me again XD. We are working on some changes to the RFC for admin panel and we realized we need some columns for a user depending on the status. A user can be: banned, can be verified and can be deleted. As I see it, there is three possible status of a user. Or at least that´s what we need for the admin panel. Would you mind giving me some information about how have you thought to implement it? That would be so useful for our team. thanks so much
@LeomarisReyes

[PFranciscoRojas]

HI @jacorreamed @YaelRmz we implement a change with the schema DB we rename the field is_verified to status and have a relation with an ENUM where it will contain the status previous mentioned (banned, verified, deleted) I assume that the status is exclusive, I mean, that there is no combination between them.

[jacorreamed]

HI @PFranciscoRojas I get it and I think the status is exclusive too. Just one thing, in the schema I can see Verified, activaded, deleted. It would be great if you include the status banned as you mentioned in the comment.
In that order the ENUM would be: verified, active, deleted and banned
And the user life cycle would be: active -> verified -> banned/deleted

and one last thing, I suppose the initial status for a user is active right?

Thanks a lot.

@LeomarisReyes

[PFranciscoRojas]

Yes @jacorreamed the initial status it will be active and the ENUM is up to date with the four statuses.

Greetings

[jacorreamed]

Hello @PFranciscoRojas I´d like to make a suggestion for you. I can see in the user schema a field first_name and second_name (same for last_name: first_surname and second_surname) since we (admin panel) create admin user, I recommend you to use just first_name and last_name as you can fill this field in this way: first_name: Jairo Andres sur_name: Correa Medina. This in order to avoid empty data in the database and reduce the number of fields in the form that we use to create and admin. I can be beneficial for the user creation too. I´d like to know what you think about it.

[malonr-zz]

Hello @jacorreamed, I talked to @PFranciscoRojas about what you've mentioned above. He mentioned that first_name, second_name should be separated because of the 1FN (DB normalization)

[jacorreamed]

Hello @PFranciscoRojas, right now we are discussing with front-end team (from admin panel) and we realize that we need to create a new field for the database named validated with a boolean value and delete the verified status. This was something that didn't appear in the beginning.

[malonr-zz]

Hello @jacorreamed, I hope you're doing well. At the moment, we've got these two fields: verified which is a boolean value, and a field called status which has the following values: 'active','deactivated', 'deleted', and 'banned'. Do you want us to change the name of the field verified to validated?

[jacorreamed]

Hi @malonr, not at all, that´s ok. If you already have the filed verified is perfect. I just that I couldn´t see it in the diagram.

greetings