What is the test for issuing a summons for an action to invalidate an ordinance approving a redevelopment project?

The reasoning in Community Redevelopment Agency v. Superior Court, supra, 248 Cal.App.2d 164, 177, 56 Cal.Rptr. 201, is very much consistent with our holding. That case held that, in an action to invalidate an ordinance approving a redevelopment project, where plaintiffs did not allege they were owners of all the property in the project, any attempt to adjudicate the rights of other property owners and other interested persons without proper notice would have been futile. However, in that case the summons originally issued was fatally defective in that it was Not directed to "all persons interested" in the matter of the validity of the redevelopment plan in issue. The "corrected summons" in that case was directed to "all persons interested" in the project, but the corrected summons was not timely and therefore did not confer jurisdiction on the court.