* Adding more context to `/admin/abtests`
Prior to this commit, the `/admin/abtests` was fully rendered by the
field_test gem (see
https://github.com/ankane/field_test/blob/master/app/views/field_test/experiments/index.html.erb
and
https://github.com/ankane/field_test/blob/master/app/views/field_test/experiments/show.html.erb).
With this commit, we're pre-pending our own
partial (e.g. `app/views/field_test/experiments/_experiments.html.erb`)
in the view paths; which means instead of rendering
https://github.com/ankane/field_test/blob/master/app/views/field_test/experiments/_experiments.html.erb
we render our newly created
`app/views/field_test/experiments/_experiments.html.erb`)
Why the ugly antics in the view? As I'm not fully certain if this will
"meet" the full needs of those monitoring the experiments. I'm also
constructing this to most closely match the spreadsheet that has been
assembled for tracking this information.
Why introduce another caching layer for the variant assembly? The
original caching
layer (e.g. `Articles::Feeds::VariantAssembler.pre_assembled_variants`)
is in place to provide the quickest access to the assembled variants.
But due to the nature of the implemented view, we are needing a
programmatic representation of all variants. And the added Rails cache
is there to minimize disk reads.
Closesforem/forem#17820
* Update app/models/articles/feeds/variant_assembler.rb
Co-authored-by: Ridhwana <Ridhwana.Khan16@gmail.com>
* Update app/models/articles/feeds/variant_assembler.rb
Co-authored-by: Ridhwana <Ridhwana.Khan16@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ridhwana <Ridhwana.Khan16@gmail.com>
Prior to this commit, as a matter of undocumented practice, we would
overwrite past experiments with upcoming experiments.
With this commit, we're leveraging a feature of the field_test gem:
declaring a winner. Instead of overwriting an experiment with the next
experiment, we're going to declare the expiring experiment's winner then
prepend to the ./config/field_test.yml the new experiment.
The [field_test/app/views/field_test/experiments/index.html.erb][1] then
uses logic to first render "active" experiments and "completed"
experiments. A "completed" experiment is one in which we've declared a
winner.
Closesforem/forem#17816
[1]:https://github.com/ankane/field_test/blob/master/app/views/field_test/experiments/index.html.erb
* added ability to assign moderator role via admin/super admin
* create Mod User in seeds
* add Cypress specs
* fix failing Cypress tests
* fix failing specs by moving test Mod user to the end
* nudge Travis
* nudge Travis
Co-authored-by: Arit Amana <msarit@gmail.com>
With comments, publishing articles, and reactions we had symmetry on two
goals:
- Create a _subject_ (e.g. Comment, Published Article, Reaction)
- Create four _subjects_ within a week.
For page views we only had "Create four _subjects_ within a week." This
PR addes the "Create a _subject_".
To do this required adjusting some tests as they were too specific in
nature (looking at an expected count).
In addition, in consultation with Jennie, I've updated the experiment
order to better reflect some hierarchical importance.
**Rollback considerations:**
This also includes a feature flag that we can explicitly disable if we
overload the application with workers handling reaction goals. Using
`FeatureFlag.accessible?(:field_test_event_single_create_pageview)`
returns `true` unless we explicitly disable this flag.
Related to forem/forem#17673
Related to forem/forem#17669Closesforem/forem#17691
This commit adds three new feed experiment goals:
* user publishes four posts within a week
* user reacts with a "heart", "unicorn", or "reading list" to an article
* user reacts with a "heart", "unicorn", or "reading list" to an article
four times in a week
In addition it adds it to the existing experiment. Adding it to the
existing experiment is acceptable because:
1. We can ignore the results
2. The experiments are structured such that these new goals could be met
with prior data.
3. Both variants are playing by the same rules, so the results relative
to each other are valid.
**There is a nuanced assumption in how we handle reactions:**
This implementation does not count by unique article reactions. However,
most folks will ❤️ , 🦄 , and 🔖 in one swoop; thus
those 3 reactions are all grouped into happening on one day.
Further, it's a reflection of the person taking an action after reading
a post, not how much action on that particular post.
**Rollback considerations:**
This also includes a feature flag that we can explicitly disable if we
overload the application with workers handling reaction goals. Using
`FeatureFlag.accessible?(:field_test_event_for_reactions)` returns
`true` unless we explicitly disable this flag.
Closesforem/forem#17669
The [`ArticlePolicy#moderate?`][1] method answers the questions around article
moderation.
At present this change does not introduce any significant changes (aside
from the JS logic loop). The next "step" is to adjust the
`ArticlePolicy#moderate?` method to test if the user has a moderator
role.
Further, we'd need to see what is available on the action panel.
Related to forem/forem#17606
[1]:5ac3216a5a/app/policies/article_policy.rb (L160-L174)
* Adding new relevancy lever for privileged reactions
This PR includes four changes:
1. Renaming the variant to remove Jennie's name
2. Starting a new experiment
3. Adding a new relevancy lever
4. Adding a new variant that uses the relevancy lever
1 and 2 is somewhat straight-forward.
For 3, we're looking at having a total of 5 "slots" for privileged user
reactions. Hence the four boundary values.
For 4, we're configuring the granular levers with the following:
- `[-∞..-5)` should have a 0.05
- `[-5..0)` should have a 0.5
- `[0..5)` should have a 0.9
- `[5..10)` should have a 0.98
- `[10..∞)` should have a 1.0
The 20220509-variant.json is a copy of 20220422-variant.json but
replaces the `privileged_user_reaction` lever with the
`privileged_user_reaction_granular` lever.
Below is the diff to highlight the similarities and differences between
the two variants.
```shell
❯ diff config/feed-variants/20220509-variant.json config/feed-variants/20220422-variant.json
90c90
< "privileged_user_reaction_granular": {
---
> "privileged_user_reaction": {
92,96c92,93
< [-2, 0.05],
< [-1, 0.5],
< [0, 0.9],
< [1, 0.98],
< [2, 1]
---
> [-1, 0.2],
> [1, 1]
98,102c95,97
< "fallback": 0.9,
< "very_negative_reaction_threshold": -5,
< "negative_reaction_threshold": 0,
< "positive_reaction_threshold": 5,
< "very_positive_reaction_threshold": 10
---
> "fallback": 0.95,
> "negative_reaction_threshold": -10,
> "positive_reaction_threshold": 10
```
Closesforem/forem#17584
* Update app/models/articles/feeds.rb
Co-authored-by: Josh Puetz <josh@dev.to>
* Adjusting testing logic to reflect latest experiment
* Adjusting negative threshold
Co-authored-by: Josh Puetz <josh@dev.to>
* Adding a field test option for post publishing goals
We have page view and comment view "goals" but have not looked at
publication "goals". We're using these "goals" to help us refine the
feed towards sustainable engagement and community health.
The conjecture on publication goals is that the content on the feed
itself can nudge folks in their decision to publish posts.
Closesforem/forem#17585
* Fixing broken test
Prior to this commit, the SQL fragments included variables that were set
configured at a global level.
With this commit, we're now saying that each lever "knows" what variable
it needs; and providing the means at lever declaration time to "say"
what those variable names are. (e.g. `Articles::Feeds::LEVER_CATALOG`).
Then as part of the variant configuration (in the
`./config/feed-variants/*.json` files) we now include the expected value
of those parameters; which by convention (and coercion) are integers.
This relates to forem/forem#17584 because we want to move from a
privileged user reaction that has two values (`negative` and `positive`)
into four values (`very_negative`, `negative`, `positive`, and
`very_positive`). To do that, we'll create a new lever; but that's for
another pull request.
* Moving Experiments into AbExperiment namespace
This commit entails two major concepts:
1. Extracting logic out of a worker.
2. Cleaning the conditions in which we convert experiments.
In addition, I revisited some spec names to tidy them up for
clarification and structure.
**Extracting Logic...**
For workers, my preference is that they be a simple router to another
object. A non-worker object, with it's initialize method, can both
better manage instance variables. Further, workers are somewhat "flat"
in hierarchy,
In this case, having the AbExperiment be knowledgeable both in setting
the experiment and handling conversions makes (to me) organizational
sense. For example, the AbExperiment is constructed as a wrapper to the
FieldTest gem. But the RecordFieldTestEventWorker had knowledge of
FieldTest.
With this refactor, it does not have that knowledge. This also provided
an opportunity to replace magic strings with constants.
**Cleaning the conditions...**
This relates directly to and closesforem/forem#17530. I was looking at
the experiments after 2 days, and realized that there shouldn't be
results for
`user_views_pages_on_at_least_nine_different_days_within_two_weeks`;
after all the experiment started 2 days ago, how can we have results
that look at 2 weeks.
By adding the "max" function calls, we ensure a clear boundary of
"before the experiment began" versus "while the experiment is running".
Closesforem/forem#17530
* Update spec/models/ab_experiment_spec.rb
Co-authored-by: Mac Siri <krairit.siri@gmail.com>
* Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Mac Siri <krairit.siri@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
When we merge this, Forem admins will see the "Admin > Content Manager >
Spaces" section in their Admin area. This will then allow them to
toggle on and off spaces.
Closesforem/forem#17161
You had a good ride, but your successor, the
`Articles::Feeds::VariantQuery`, is doing well in production. And has
been for quite awhile.
You helped us get to a better spot in regards to the feed algorithm, but
your time has come to rest as a memory in our git history.
* Allowing VariantQuery for Feed Generation
Apologies for the breadth of this pull request, I had considered many
small commits, but felt that would've been more effort for the value
provided.
This commit includes the following:
- Documentation updates to the feed variant (though not the final pass)
- Renaming and adding RelevancyLevers that help differentiate
- Adding RelevancyLever#range to provide documentation
- Reducing redundent controller logic by making a
`Articles::Feeds.feed_for` method.
- Adding some configuration validation for RelevancyLevers
- Adding constants for better clarification
- Testing unhappy paths for feed configuration
- Adjusting the module namespace of some objects
- Exposing top-level configurations for variants (along with their
defaults)
- Creating the VariantyQuery that at present inherits from the
`Articles::Feeds::WeightedQueryStrategy`
As implemented, we can deploy this code to production without using the
new VariantQuery. Once we toggle on the
`:feed_uses_variant_query_feature` FeatureFlag, it will switch to using
the VariantQuery. The VariantQuery's two variants and the
internal configuration of `Articles::Feeds::WeightedQueryStrategy`
produce the same query.
The goal of this factor is to allow for a quick on and off toggle of the
feed query; to ensure that what we introduce remains performant.
- Closesforem/forem#17272
- Closesforem/forem#17276
- Closesforem/forem#17216
In addition, I will be recording a code-walkthrough and linking that
recording to the pull request.
* Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: Mac Siri <krairit.siri@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Mac Siri <krairit.siri@gmail.com>
We avoid busting a user cache for 15 minutes but the tag cache is 5
hours. So we want to "nudge things along".
What this is trying to solve is the server side rendering of whether we
hide or show a button.
Related to forem/forem#17324
Related to forem/forem#17119
**tl;dr** This PR is looking to provide a means to programmatically
assemble, from system configurations, what is currently the
[Articles::Feeds::WeightedQueryStrategy::SCORING_METHOD_CONFIGURATIONS][1].
Once we merge this PR, instead of having that constant, we'll initialize
the Articles::Feeds::WeightedQueryStrategy with the variant
configuration that we've assembled.
**Introduction**
This pull request has quite a bit going on, but as of now the production
code does not use any of it.
*Note: None of this code is bleeding into production code paths.*
Put your Ruby hat on and let's go for a ride. And apologizes for not
making this a smaller pull request. As I built this, I made many small
commits, but this became the smallest commit that provided the most
context without integrating into production code.
Before we get started, you may want to familiarize yourself with where
we're going. The `./app/models/articles/feeds/README.md` provides
further guidance; but fair warning reader, I have not reconciled the
README's language with what emerged as I wrote this pull request.
Those of you who are part of Forem Core team, you can read the
[Refinements to Our Present Feed Configuration][2]
to provide some insight into what's happening.
**Why not reconcile?** *Because I want to have all of the language and
thoughts available for you to help consider how best to name and model
this.*
**On to the Review**
The purpose of this pull request is to provide a mechanism for
engineering to provide a series of variant query levers. And to allow
us to easily configure those available query levers into a variant
query.
*Why the mix of Ruby configuration and JSON?*
The Ruby levers are meant to indicate that this is code we don't want to
expose in text based configuration because it might create SQL inject
points. (More on that when we integrate the code of this PR into the
production implementation)
The JSON levers are meant to indicate that "anyone" can pick the
appropriate/available levers and configure how they are set. In other
words, these values do not create SQL injection issues.
**What I Need from You**
I am putting this forward as a draft so you can read this code ahead of
time. I'm then going to schedule a synchronous code review where we
record our collective walk through of the implementation.
Closes:
- forem/forem#17268
- forem/forem#17269
- forem/forem#17270
- forem/forem#17271
- forem/forem#17273
Relates to:
- forem/forem#17308
- forem/forem#17245
[1]:6818ef3ed0/app/services/articles/feeds/weighted_query_strategy.rb (L84-L231)
[2]:https://forem.team/jeremy/refinements-to-our-present-feed-configuration-1p0c
* ContextNotification model
* Create and destroy context notifications when notifications are sent/unsent
* Added a transaction when creating notifications and context notifications
* Documentation for context notifications
* Adds data to the member column in Member Index View
* Adds roles, statuses, and latest activity to Member Index views
* Adds the list of orgs a user belongs to in Member Index view
* Updates the image URL to link to each users member detail view
* Adds comment_suspended to user current_status and makes roles prettier
* Fixes bullet warning and encapsulates org logic in method
* Properly displays today and yesterday in words
* Refactors #current_organizations to use ternary
* Updates user.rb Member Index View-related methods
* Adjusts the styling of user roles and adds tooltip to roles
* Updates Member Index View to be mobile-friendly
* Updates userIndexView.spec.js
* Updates capitalization within userIndexView.spec.js
* Updates Member Index View per mobile designs and feedback
* Adds member status logic inline with SVGs
* Updates the status column for mobile layout
* Adjust current_role tooltips for Member Index View
* Adds organization name tooltip to member orgas
* Adds organization pics to Member Index View and cleans up helpers
* Addresses PR review feedback (Thanks, Suzanne!)
* Uses CSS in place of SVGs for member statuses
* Adds E2E test for and removes link to org page from Member Index View
* Addresses PR feedback comments by refactoring Member Index View code
* Removes leftover code in user.rb
* Update method that tooltips rely on
* Spells regular correctly :
* Adds a spec that tests Admin::UsersHelper#format_last_activity_timestamp
* Adjusts #cascading_high_level_roles logic and roles
* Adds a spec for #cascading_high_level_roles
* Adds a #last_activity spec to the User model
* Adjusts code a bit per PR feedback. Thanks, Ridhwana! :)
* Updates specs for Member Index View helpers
* Adds Timecop.freeze to help with timestamp failure in user_spec.rb
* WIP - Conditional rendering of "Create Post" link
This PR builds on the conversation from forem/forem#17056 and moves in a
slightly different direction.
Important in all of this is that the ability to create a post is
enforced on the server. If the "Create Post" button were to be visible
but the user couldn't create a post when they clicked the button, they
would get an authorization error (or some such response).
This PR posits a different and perhaps competing approach to
forem/forem#16606. This PR provides a general approach in which we add
class attributes in our HTML erb files.
Note: I have not included Cypress tests as I don't want to yet commit
that time. I'm also wondering if this is the "right" thing to do. I
definitely think we want to add some JS tests. But could we do JS and
unit tests? (How do we reach consensus regarding our test approach?)
Again, thank you for the conversation and expect an even more "complete"
PR after we have our discussion.
* Extracting AsyncInfo model to ease testing
* Renaming forbidden to visible
* Adding cypress test to assert no 'Create Post'
These are always treacherous. What happens when we rename the button?
The test will continue to work.
* Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Switching to pack file for policy
Follows on [Suzanne's comment](https://github.com/forem/forem/pull/17076#issuecomment-1088567286)
* Update app/javascript/packs/applyApplicationPolicyToggles.js
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* transliterate when generating attribute names to avoid emptiness
If you enter a non-ascii (non `\w` matching) string as the profile
field label, the attribute name is the empty string.
This causes problems outlined in #16391
To avoid losing user provided data, transliterate (Sterile is the same
tool we're using for Article#title_to_slug) before matching against
the word regex.
If we persist an empty string, or persist a non-`\w` name, the
coordinating regex in Profile::ATTRIBUTE_NAME_REGEX will leave a nil
match and raise NoMethodError (the method missing is for
match[:attribute_name] when match was nil, not Profile - that's the
next commit.
* Guard against nil matches
If an attribute name doesn't match the regex, the match is nil, and
trying to access (nil)[:attribute_name] raises a NoMethodError.
If there was no match, assume profile does not respond to the
selector, and don't handle it in method missing.
* Ensure generated attribute name is valid before saving
This raises a validation error if the generated name (from the label)
would be empty.
It's not an optimal error message (since the user can't see the
internal attribute name) but it prevents persisting broken/empty data
* actually raise error when validating
validate/valid? only return true or false (and set errors on the
object). In order to reject the creation, we need to raise a
validation error, not only call validate. I think this is because the
execution of before_create hooks happens after validation (which is
why the validation was only checked on update, not create).
* Generate an attribute name completely independent of the field label
This prevents mistakenly labeling a field "Class" or "Association" or
one of the other hundred public methods an AR model like Profile
exposes. Since attribute_name will be passed to `profile.public_send`
we really shouldn't build selectors from user supplied inputs.
* Use the admin supplied label in the sidebar
The profile decorator is used in the Users#show page to populate the
sidebar fields. Don't use the attribute name (which we mangled during
creation, and now generate randomly) as the label, use the label.
* Make the label lookup null safe, and filter attributes more
* Update data update script to not expect predictable labels
This is low impact since it ran in july, but we no longer know what
attribute name a label will create.
* Fix moderator spec
"Test Field" label no longer predictably generates :test_field as an
attribute name. Ask the field what it's name is before asking profile
about it.
* Fix profile preview card request spec
Remove the assumption that profile responds to a method name based on
the label for Work and Education fields.
* Update old DUS and its test
This can probably be archived
* Update profile spec to use fields generated attribute names
We used to "know" how attributes were generated from labels. Now we don't.
* update e2e seeds for profile field change
* Don't expect attribute name to be based on the label
* expect created profile fields respond to their attribute name
* Update system test
The label, not the attribute name, is shown on the profile form (the
field has an id related to the attribute name, but the view shows the
mutable/human-readable label).
* Keep the field title lowercase when sending the json preview card
The userMetadata component expects "work" and "education" to be
attributes of the metadata, but the ui_attributes_for() method was
titlizing these (for display).
Ideally we wouldn't have "special purposed" these two field names, but
they're there.
* update profile field by attribute name, not based on label
* Update profile field removal assumptions
We don't know what the method selectors will be, we have to ask.
* remove old test
* Update translations for Education and Work
Since the ui_attributes_for(area:) now gives the label, not the
attribute, we need to match the label of the profile field.
Note to self: this exposes an issue in localizing the custom profile
fields (probably a bigger problem for large, international communities
like DEV than some others, but trying to match static translation
files against user-modifiable database records seems like a problem
we'll see again).
* Empty commit to retrigger buildkite
* Remove profile field migration update scripts
Cloned the specs from the other "remove unused scripts" script.
* Remove unused scripts
The data update script removes the entry from the table (recording
that these have run) - we also want to remove the files (preventing
them from running again).
* remove unneeded spec for removed file
* when translation for header area field not found, use the title
Only Work and Education already have keys in the yml translation file,
and there's not a great (or easy?) way to make multiple translations
on these fields right now.
Since an admin can create a new field, and assign it to the header
area, we can't assume the code has a configured translation key for
this field.
Fallback to the title (we do this in another context already) if
there's no translation.
* PR feedback: Avoid n+1 query for labels
the original implementation of "label_for_attribute" had an n+1 query
looping over each matched key.
Follow suggested improvement and pull labels and attributes at once
from the db and modify the returned hash.
* Downcase title before looking for translation key
This avoids putting "odd" capitalized keys into the yml translation
file
Revert addition of "Work" and "Education" to the users files.
* use a let binding for duplicated test data
* Update app/models/profile_field.rb
prefer SecureRandom.hex for a dashless uuid (instead of removing the dashes).
Co-authored-by: Jamie Gaskins <jgaskins@hey.com>
Co-authored-by: Jamie Gaskins <jgaskins@hey.com>
There are three major things occurring in this pull request:
1. Renaming `Article#update_cached_user` to `Article#set_cached_entities`.
2. Reducing an organization's direct knowledge of which of the org's
attributes an article caches.
3. Removing duplicate calls to update the article associated with the
organization.
For renaming to `Article#set_cached_entities`, the prior method implied
we were updating the persistence layer. However, we were not making any
save nor update calls. This rename should clarify intention.
For reducing knowledge, the comments for
`Article::ATTRIBUTES_CACHED_FOR_RELATED_ENTITY` should explain the details.
And last, removing the duplicate calls; we had three methods that were
attempting to build and update the `Article#cached_organization`'s
value.
Closesforem/forem#17041
* Added a way to sort comments on an article
* Sorting of comments now uses crayons-dropwn. Some minor fixes as per comments on PR
* Add and fix test cases for sorting comments functionality
* Changes in code for sort comments. Code is more aligned with forem's conventions
* Added cyperss tests for sort comments on an article. Cleaned up code to better follow forem conventions
* Get fresh handle of triggerButton everytime clickOustideListener is clicked. Fix Cypress test cases to reflect the earlier.
This menu item will show up once you have added the
`:limit_post_creation_to_admins` feature flag (regardless of whether
it is enabled or not).
If you wish to add the menu item:
```console
rails console runner "FeatureFlag.add(:limit_post_creation_to_admins)"
```
In "adding" the item, it will default to disabled. However, as an
administrator you should now be able to toggle on and off the
authorization enforcement.
If you wish to remove the menu item:
```console
rails console runner "FeatureFlag.remove(:limit_post_creation_to_admins)"
```
Future plans for this will be to remove the `FeatureFlag.exist?`
conditional so that the menu item shows up. A major consideration is
that we'll assume that all Forem's have a "default space" in which
folks (by default) can post.
Builds on forem/forem#16897Closesforem/forem#16842
As I was looking to implement the new Spaces feature (see
forem/forem#16842), I began looking at how to adjust the admin menu. I
found the Menu and AdminMenu. I wanted to add the "spaces" item under
the `:content_manager` scope. Looking at the implementation, I saw I
would need some additional branching logic.
To get an understanding of the implementation, I chose factor towards
classes.
This refactor does a few things:
1) Clarifies a method name (e.g. "children?" becomes
"has_multiple_children?")
2) Adds some tests of the menu implementation.
3) Removes deeply nested hashs in favor of first class objects.
4) Removes a complex method for determining menu visibility, instead
favoring a method that either takes a boolean OR a lambda.
There are further refactors to consider, especially in regards to the
helper methods and some of the coercion of strings into different
formats. But this refactor gets me the part I most am interested in:
Making it easier to specify a menu item as visible or not.
* Penciling in a Default Spaces section
This delivers two primary things:
1. Extracting shared policy examples
2. Providing a functioning skeleton for toggling on the
"limit_post_creation_to_admins" feature.
Important is that once merged, it would be possible for this code to
"leak" out. But how that leaks out is also how you can test that the
feature works.
First, to orient, there is a constraint for a new route. That
constraint checks if the feature flag exists (e.g. has been explicitly
enabled or explicitly disabled). In other words, at this point, you
can't accidentally enable the feature via the UI. But once you have
enabled the feature, you can then toggle the feature on and off.
So, to test this in the browser:
1. Pull down this branch
2. Run `rails runner "FeatureFlag.disable(:limit_post_creation_to_admins)"`
3. Startup your the web server.
4. Login as an administrator
5. Goto /admin/content_manager/spaces
a. Bask in the glory of a plain HTML form
6. With another browser, login as another non-admin user
7. Go to /settings/extensions, you should see a section Publishing from RSS.
8. Now with the admin's session, update the form to turn on
"limit_post_creation_to_admins"
9. Back to the non-admin browser, refresh /settings/extensions, you
should no longer see the section Publishing from RSS.
Note: I have not included an admin menu item as that is related to and
dependent on some refactors I'm working on (see forem/forem#16888 and
forem/forem#16847). So a bit of "security through obsurity"
Note: In the future, once we resolveforem/forem#16490, we'll start
toggling the "Create a Post" button.
Note: I am not including Cypress tests nor request tests for this
feature because the implementation details related to the testing via
that approach are a little too volitale.
Related to forem/forem#16842
* Updating copy based on forem/forem#16893
* styles
* styles
* dark styles
Co-authored-by: Paweł Ludwiczak <ludwiczakpawel@gmail.com>
* Adding docs and specs to AdminMenu.nested_menu_items
This relates to PR forem/forem#16847 which addresses issue
forem/forem#16842.
The goal of this PR is to help me develop an understanding of the
AdminMenu so I can further extend it and better understand it.
There's also a bit of knowledge sharing that I'm looking for, and the
comments and tests are there to help "confirm" that knowledge. There
might be more that I'd consider regarding a refactor, but I want to make
sure I'm on the right path before I go further.
tl;dr - this is the smallest commit I can make to begin to tease out an
understanding of the method I put under test.
* Update app/models/admin_menu.rb
Co-authored-by: Ridhwana <Ridhwana.Khan16@gmail.com>
* Adding more documentation
* Update app/models/admin_menu.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ridhwana <Ridhwana.Khan16@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Normalize article titles
* Change method name to match what it does
* Expand on allowed emoji ranges
This required a few changes to be in compliance with Rubocop because
that regex is a beast.
* Adding indirection for Tag#name to ease future work
In pairing with Arit, we were able to capture a few small wins in
regards to favoring an accessible tag name. In other words, where ever
you see a tag's name, we want to render it as camel-case. This will
greatly help those using a screen reader and frankly visually scanning
the tag (idontknowaboutyoubutthisiskindahardtoread).
However, as we explored the
code base, we found several places that will require further
consideration. These revolve around the API and caching of tags for
articles and listings as well as the JSON documents we use for
populating drop-down lists.
So, instead of unleashing a large pull request, we're opting to provide
a small non-breaking refactor that demonstrates where we're going and
keeps production working as expected while allowing future
development/testing to benefit from these captured gains.
Our next steps are to revisit the related issue and do a proper task
breakdown, becuase there are too many considerations to call this a
"small win".
I also encourage reviewers to read the comments. This is an emerging
mental pattern that I believe helps us conceptually move our codebase
forward while also guarding against the mega-PR with oodles of commits
and file changes that span numerous contexts.
Related to forem/forem-internal-eng#269
* Expanding specs to address feedback
* Don't send notification for invalid reactions
When a moderator flags a user,
and an admin marks this invalid
and the moderator tries to flag the user again
then destroy the existing reaction, and check whether to notify
Since the points for invalid reactions are set to 0, this was not being
skipped. Now it will be.
* cleanup test cases for reaction skip notification
* feat: create a from_email_address and a reply_to_email_address
* feat: update other mailers with the new SMTP email settings
* test: update all spec files
* fix: use the SMTP::Settings value
* fix tests
* spec: fix the comma
* feat: tighten some logic
* fix: test
* fix tests
* fix tests
* final fix test commit
* fix test
* fix test
* oops
* feat: add a reply_to for Devise Mailer
* chore: update the description
* use a proc for reply_to
* feat: update text
* Update spec/mailers/digest_mailer_spec.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update spec/mailers/verification_mailer_spec.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update spec/mailers/shared_examples/renders_proper_email_headers.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* refactor: move OPTIONS to a helper as its only being used in the view layer
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* feat: allow reply_to and email_from to be set for an SMTP config
* feat: use these SMTP values in the mailers
* spec: test the application_mailer
* fix: validate with email, and not url
* feat: mimic macs changes from https://github.com/forem/forem/pull/16216 to use in this PR
* setup packs for admin
* refactor: order the keys and add a const for the auth methods
* feat: rename the header to a more user friendlly name
* chore: move the section with Emails
* feat: add a toggle that will show and hide the SMTP form under certain conditions
* feat: add the javaScript to handle the toggles
* feat: add a better description until we convert to a dropdown
* feat: ensure that we have declared sendgrid_enabled
* chore: add anote to the config controller
* chore: remove references of the email addresses to keep brnach scoped
* feat: tweak js
* test: cypress workflow to update smtp settings
* feat : update the smtp tests
* remove comments
* update test
* chore: rename NOTE
* feat: polisha dn test ForemInstance.only_sendgrid_enabled?
* chore: remove specs
* Update app/lib/constants/settings/smtp.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update spec/system/admin/config/admin_updates_smtp_settings_spec.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update spec/system/admin/config/admin_updates_smtp_settings_spec.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update spec/system/admin/config/admin_updates_smtp_settings_spec.rb
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update app/javascript/packs/admin/config/smtp.js
Co-authored-by: Nick Taylor <nick@iamdeveloper.com>
* refactor js as per comments
* refactor as per comments
* Update cypress/integration/seededFlows/adminFlows/config/emailServerSettingsSection.spec.js
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* refactor: update the Cypress tests
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Nick Taylor <nick@iamdeveloper.com>
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* feat: remove the default email and cobine the periodic digest and the contact email under the Email section
* refactor: rename the email_link to contact link and use the contact_email as a default and fallback to the ForemInstance.email
* chore: alignment
* feat: use the contact_email helper
* feat: move the contact_email to the ForemInstance model
* feat: use ForemInstance.contact_email instead of the application helper method
* removed the application Helper
* feat: set the dafault on the contact_email
* fix: cypress tests
* Update app/lib/constants/settings/general.rb
Co-authored-by: Michael Kohl <me@citizen428.net>
Co-authored-by: Michael Kohl <me@citizen428.net>
* Require profile fields to belong to a group
Remove the empty group dropdown from the group select tag
Remove the optional: true from the belongs_to validation (raise a
validation error on save if the group is not provided)
Update test to remove belongs_to's optional setting
* Update ProfileFields::Add spec to include profile field group
* update factory to ensure a non-empty profile field group
* Add required profile field group to seeded profile fields
Since profile field is required, create was failing (silently).
Add required field so these are available in e2e tests.
* Use factory `association` to create a profile field group
https://github.com/thoughtbot/factory_bot/blob/master/GETTING_STARTED.md#explicit-definition
* provide required profile field group when posting data
* Fix one spec, drop another
Both of these scripts will be removed in the other branch (changing
the attribute name) - dropping the test here seems lower trouble than
modifying an out of data data update script to pass.
* skip test slated for removal
Similar to the last commit - this test exercises a script about to be
archived in the other branch.
* figuring things out
* working both ways for issues PRs except disc and PRreview
* working on repo urls
* complete implementation and check specs
* resolve Travis failures
* resolving travis failures
* Fix VCR cassette
* fix regexs
Co-authored-by: Jamie Gaskins <jgaskins@hey.com>
