Description of problem: / RedHat / Service / Provisioning / Email / ServiceTemplateProvisionRequest_Denied Lines 24 and 29 attempt to append to not yet defined objects, "body" in both cases. Error for 29: [----] E, [2015-06-16T22:16:09.847660 #2083:6c92ccc] ERROR -- : Q-task_id([service_template_provision_request_1000000000128]) <AEMethod servicetemplateprovisionrequest_denied> [undefined method `+' for nil:NilClass] <code: body += "<br>A service request received from #{requester_email} was denied.">:29:in `approver_denied_text' <code: body += approver_denied_text(requester_email, msg, reason)>:37:in `approver_text' <code: send_mail(to, from, subject, approver_text(appliance, msg, requester_email))>:59:in `email_approver' <code: email_approver(appliance, msg)>:101:in `<main>' Error for 24: [----] E, [2015-06-16T22:22:18.919802 #2086:72e136c] ERROR -- : Q-task_id([service_template_provision_request_1000000000129]) <AEMethod servicetemplateprovisionrequest_denied> [undefined method `+' for nil:NilClass] <code: body += " <a href='https://#{appliance}/miq_request/show/#{@miq_request.id}'</a>">:24:in `approver_href' <code: body += approver_href(appliance)>:39:in `approver_text' <code: send_mail(to, from, subject, approver_text(appliance, msg, requester_email))>:59:in `email_approver' <code: email_approver(appliance, msg)>:101:in `<main>' How reproducible: Submit provision which will be denied for example by being over quota.
This issue was resolved in: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1227945 http://gitlab.cloudforms.lab.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/cloudforms/cfme_productization/merge_requests/59
Checked in 5.5.0.6. I made the request to become automatically denied and the method went ok. Also checked the code and the "body += '...'" is not present.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015:2551