* Removing a JS message about connect
Related to forem/forem#14734
* Remvoing another reference
I ran `rg Connect[^i]` to see about any remaining references to
Connect. This one seems to be the last.
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
* Adding ArticlePolicy#has_existing_articles_or_can_create_new_ones?
As part of our aspirations to only show users what is relevant to them
and "hiding" what is not, this method will help us with the edge case of
"should we show the user a dashboard listing of posts?"
Related to forem/forem#16837
* Adding further documentation
* Adding clarifying comment
* Always show the browse section regardless of featured
* Add tests for /pod
* Use safe operator if there are no episodes to show
* Fix test for new podcast page
* Fix test again for podcast page
* prefer case to multiple if branches
case klass works fine on inheritance chains (we don't need to match on
inheritance explicitly).
* Verify case on error class behaves as before
* Fix tests
I don't know how I committed tests that were failing, but don't do that
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>
* complete IG implementation of profile embed, refactors, update specs
* Follow redirects and check them for validity via recursion
* working out redirects
* add IG test links with params
Co-authored-by: Dwight Scott <dwight@forem.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>
* feat: add the feature flag route and controller
* feat: add a ff page
* feat: update to a post with a success banner
* feat: test the feature
* feat: update the styling
* feat: change feature flag to extension witha few more improvements like adding a model not backed by a table
* feat: update the text
* refactor: if you enable a FF, it gets added under the hood as well
* feat: accessibility name for label
* use keyword args
* use locales
* Update app/views/admin/extensions/index.html.erb
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Update app/views/admin/extensions/index.html.erb
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Update app/views/admin/extensions/index.html.erb
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Update config/locales/controllers/admin/fr.yml
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Update app/controllers/admin/extensions_controller.rb
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* fix: rubucop
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Removes admin_member_view feature flags and refactors conditionals
* Removes unused admin/users/_email_tools partial and user_email_tools_spec
* Actually remove the admin/user_email_tools_spec this time
* Removes the edit route from admin.rb users
* Adds a DUS (and spec) to disable and remove admin_member_view flag
* Fixes admin/users_spec.rb failures by updating spec with Member Detail changes
* Fixes spec failures within admin_bans_or_warns_user_spec.rb
* Refactors Admin::UsersController#credit_params due to failing specs
* Removes last traces of edit_admin_user_path and fixes buttons, specs, etc.
* solution
* fixing specs
* complete specs
* nudge Travis
* resolve database issues
* nudge Travis
* Check that the settings table exists before loading the class
This maybe fixes an issue in test-console-check accessing a missing
table `users` (because we're requiring
settings during the initializer, and we're initializing the app during
a schema load on a newly created db).
* refactor check
* privatize and rename
* add self
* reposition private class method
* Prevent accidentally deploying to DEV
* Skip tests to try deploying to benhalpern
* Allow PR to deploy to benhalpern
* Allow other branches to deploy
* Oops
* Revert changes to travis.yml
Co-authored-by: Dan Uber <dan@forem.com>
Co-authored-by: Andy Z <17884966+Zhao-Andy@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.
* Limit feeds import fanout to users with feeds
This filtering for feed settings occurs in
Feeds::Import#filter_users_from already, so the enqueued ForUser
jobs were mostly no-op, but the queue latency spiked as hundreds of
thousands of jobs were added to default.
Prescreen users to avoid enqueuing a noop job every hour for every single
user without a feed.
* Update tests to check only jobs for users with feeds are enqueued
* spec cleanup
Only include alice when we check no job is enqueued for her.
Assert no job is enqueued for alice.
Rename bob to user when alice isnt there to contrast.
* Update spec
Use update_columns to bypass setting validation (checking feed is
valid/reachable)
Remove unneeded timecop block when passing a set time
Remove sidekiq: fake and allow Import.call to be received
* Empty commit to trigger CI rebuild
We had been (since the beginning) disabling webmock in this
test (which means vcr was _not_ intercepting requests and we were
making them live). This appears to have been a work-around for an
issue where the captured URL in the cassette pointed to cloudinary,
while the code was fetching from the source directly, and an unhandled
request error was raised when running the spec.
However, the upstream source (https://via.placeholder.com/350x150)
activated cloudflare bot detection, and rather than a png image
response, we were getting an unprocessable html gateway page "Checking
your browser..." from cloudflare, and the test was failing.
Point the vcr cassette at the same url the test checks, and remove the
local webmock disable.
* Fan out Feeds::ImportArticlesWorker
Doing all that work within a single Sidekiq job has begun taking over an
hour on DEV. Regardless of the reasons we did it that way originally, we
should be able to handle this concurrently. If we cannot, we need to
investigate why and handle it properly rather than consigning it to
sequential work.
* Fix specs
The specs make assumptions about how the code under test is implemented.
This commit does not change that, as much as I would like to. Instead,
it just aligns the assumptions with the new implementation.
The previous tests didn't actually represent reality though, since we
can't get a Time or ActiveSupport::TimeWithZone instance inside of the
`perform` method while running it through Sidekiq. Instead, the specs
seem to be relying on the fact that the time instance gets serialized to
ISO-8601/RFC3339 format and that that format is understood by Postgres.
Otherwise, I'm not sure how it would work in production as written.
The new specs reflect reality more closely. The `earlier_than` value
will be converted into an ISO8601/RFC3339 string when passed through
Sidekiq.
* Add parens to perform_bulk call
Turns out, we actually do this pretty consistently. I could've sworn I
saw a bunch of these calls without parens. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
* Improve variable naming
This is not a list of ids, it's a list of lists of arguments for Sidekiq
jobs, the inner of which contains an id, but that's not the only thing
it contains.
* Don't suggest users for an anonymous visitor to follow
The sidebar raises an error when rendering suggested users for a tag
when the user is signed out.
https://app.honeybadger.io/projects/66984/faults/79342962/
* Assert empty response returned for anonymous requests
This commit does three things:
1) Adds and tests the ArticlePolicy#moderate? feature
2) Refactors the spec helpers to be a bit more flexible
3) Adds a few more edge case tests around ArticlePolicy
My apologies for conflating these changes, as it makes this commit
more challenging to review.
The goal is to adequate demonstrate the logic around users who can or
cannot moderate. At present, the rules for who can moderate is here:
841491c6ee/app/javascript/packs/articleModerationTools.js (L17-L27)
```js
if (user?.trusted) {
if (user?.id !== articleAuthorId && !isModerationPage()) {
initializeActionsPanel(user, path);
initializeFlagUserModal(articleAuthorId);
// "/mod" page
} else if (isModerationPage()) {
initializeActionsPanel(user, path);
initializeFlagUserModal(articleAuthorId);
}
}
```
- Related to forem/forem#16783
- Closesforem/forem#16784
Videos are a conceptual subset of Articles (see
[VideosController#create][1] for supporting "evidence"). As such, we
want to ensure they conform to the expectations of the ArticlePolicy (as
described in forem/forem#16483).
This feature enhancement does a few things:
1. Renames swaps the `VideoPolicy#new?` and `VideoPolicy#create?`
declarations (reversing the alias direction)
2. Moves methods out of the concrete ArticlesPolicy into the
ApplicationPolicy.
3. Exposes these user oriented methods for external
consumers (e.g. making future refactoring work easier). The happy
benefit is that this already removes a bit of duplicated logic.
4. Highlights that while yes the Policy is correct, we also may be
flirting with the concept of some sort of User "properties as it relates
to authorization" logic (good standing users, established users,
etc.)
5. Reworked the timing of a guard clause and setting of instance variables.
[1]:
33e9bac0f7/app/controllers/videos_controller.rb (L18-L22))
Relates to #16483Closesforem/forem#16728
To test this, I'm relying on the existing test suite. I envision that
shifting from returning false for suspended users to raising an
exception might cause some false positive errors. Note, in the
[AppliciationController][2] we handle the responses. Paired with
[config/appliciation.rb][3], we handle the policy exceptions.
[2]:33e9bac0f7/app/controllers/application_controller.rb (L32)
[3]:33e9bac0f7/config/application.rb (L71-L81)
In looking at forem/forem#16787, it felt like we would benefit from a
similar approach as we adopted for nullifying blank strings.
This refactor helps pave the way for a "normalize_text_for" method (or
some such thing; naming things is hard).
This change also involved introducing a `describe` block into the
associated spec.
* Fix broken documentation link
When sending an invitation, and smtp isn't configured, we show a link
to the old smtp-settings page, which has been renamed
email-server-settings in the admin documentation site.
* Remove explicit link target, assert link text is present
This spec failed when I changed the link target to match the
documentation. Rather than moving the target, I'm just asserting we
show a link to the docs (not where the docs are located).
* Only fetch RSS of users who can create articles
This commit leverages changes from forem/forem#16732 and
forem/forem#16763 to ensure that we're only fetching RSS feeds for
folks who have permission to create articles.
In addition, I chose to rename the variable `user_scope` to
`users_scope` to bring consistency in the variable names.
I also chose to refactor a private method so that it wasn't setting two
instance variables but was instead returning a value that could be used
to set an instance variable.
Closesforem/forem#16487
* Amending method name
This change makes it easier to resolveforem/forem#16487.
What do I mean by that? To address forem/forem#16487, I need to only
select user's who are authorized to create articles. In
forem/forem#16732 I added a method that will allow chaining of a User
scope. So with this current commit and forem/forem#16732, I'm
triangulating on an approach that will make that change easier.
I did not want to conflate those two, as mixing this PR's change and
what is necessary for the closing PR would create a more complicated
review. Not unduly complicated, but one that will require more tests
and a change in logic. And for someone reviewing the diff, those
concerns could easily be lost.
Yes, I have changed the method signature, but that method signature is
limited to one location:
```shell
❯ rg "Feeds::Import.call"
app/workers/feeds/import_articles_worker.rb
21: ::Feeds::Import.call(users_scope: users_scope, earlier_than: earlier_than)
```
So I look to the method signature a bit as an internal API, hence the change.
Related to forem/forem#16487
* Use correct table heading for username
* WIP add role filter and crayonsify forms
* styling
* responsive
* Add form back in that was removed by merge conflict fix
* Suggest only valid search options
* Add basic tests for search and filter by role
* Add aria for search field
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
* Add email to aria
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Paweł Ludwiczak <ludwiczakpawel@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Suzanne Aitchison <suzanne@forem.com>
Co-authored-by: Julianna Tetreault <32834804+juliannatetreault@users.noreply.github.com>
As I'm looking at limiting feed fetching only for users who are able to
create articles, I needed a means of querying "Who are the users who can
create articles?" This bit of work was the smallest chunk that I could
think of.
These kinds of questsions are going to propogate (e.g. give me a list of
all the people who can comment? who can create articles in this space?)
For now, this pattern should suffice.
Yes, there's duplication of knowledge between the policy's instance
method and class method. And there's a bit of knowledge bleed between a
user's method (e.g. `user.any_admin?` and
`*Authorizer::RoleBasedQueries::ANY_ADMIN`) but that's a small "evil".
Related to #16486
This commit compresses the policy check that spanned both :new? and
:enabled?. We hide the ability to upload a video (as per the altered
html.erb files of this commit) but we didn't enforce the same logic in
the controller.
Further, as Videos are a subset of Article, I'm adding the "verify the
user is not suspended" test.
Directly relates to #16483
For sleuthing this relates:
- #16728
- forem/forem#16537
- #16634
And for historical context, this relates to:
- #10955
- #10954
- forem/internalEngineering#149
* 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
As part of the [Authorization System Use Case
1:1](https://github.com/orgs/forem/projects/46) project, we are driving
towards the feature of: "Only admin's may post articles in this Forem."
This commit ensures that the API's "create an article" end-point
delivers on that feature.
Along the way, I've added reading notes and comments, to help us further
flex in the future (namely move all authorization checks into a policy
object).
Closesforem/forem#16488
* Trigger Build
* Remove cache header before_action and add ability to search by tag name
* Remove cache header before_action and add ability to search by tag name
* Add internal bulk tag endpoint to get tags by array of names or ids
* Restore V0 tags controller
* Update identities where the auth data dump is a plain hash
All but 3 records in DEV have OmniAuth::AuthHash objects serialized as
auth data dump. Normalize the remaining ones so they don't cause no
method errors when we treat the auth_data_dump as an object (sending
`#info` instead of asking for `['info']`).
should address https://app.honeybadger.io/projects/66984/faults/84183659
Add null safety check in a second example (that null values should not
cause an error, and should not be coerced to auth hashes).
* Ignore rubocop suggestion to create list
Because the factory for identities doesn't automatically create the
required user object, this is impractical.
While I'm here, move the identity hash update into the creation block
rather than doing this in two passes.
Co-authored-by: Jamie Gaskins <jgaskins@hey.com>
* Removes logo_svg-related code
* Removes logo_svg-related specs
* Removes the logo_uploader and logo_uploader DUS spec
* Removes the logo_uploader_spec.rb
* Adds a DUS to remove the logo_svg var from the DB
* Reverts the removal of the logo_svg_uploader.rb
* If href is nil, allow node
* Add unit test showing no change
My first pass had the `<a>` within an h1 content, but the scrubber
added a newline after the closing a tag?
