We try to use the correct variation of `email`
or `delivery_email`, even though in some
databases they are the same.
(To find the differences, I temporarily hacked
populate_db to use different values for email
and delivery_email, and reduced email visibility
in the zulip realm to admins only.)
In places where we want the "normal" realm
behavior of showing emails (and having `email`
be the same as `delivery_email`), we use
the new `reset_emails_in_zulip_realm` helper.
A couple random things:
- I fixed any error messages that were leaking
the wrong email
- a test that claimed to rely on the order
of emails no longer does (we sort user_ids
instead)
- we now use user_ids in some place where we used
to use emails
- for IRC mirrors I just punted and used
`reset_emails_in_zulip_realm` in most places
- for MIT-related tests, I didn't fix email
vs. delivery_email unless it was obvious
I also explicitly reset the realm to a "normal"
realm for a couple tests that I frankly just didn't
have the energy to debug. (Also, we do want some
coverage on the normal case, even though it is
"easier" for tests to pass if you mix up `email`
and `delivery_email`.)
In particular, I just reset data for the analytics
and corporate tests.
This reduces query counts in some cases, since
we no longer need to look up the user again. In
particular, it reduces some noise when we
count queries for O(N)-related tests.
The query count is usually reduced by 2 per
API call. We no longer need to look up Realm
and UserProfile. In most cases we are saving
these lookups for the whole tests, since we
usually already have the `user` objects for
other reasons. In a few places we are simply
moving where that query happens within the
test.
In some places I shorten names like `test_user`
or `user_profile` to just be `user`.
This commit mostly makes our tests less
noisy, since emails are no longer an important
detail of sending messages (they're not even
really used in the API).
It also sets us up to have more scrutiny
on delivery_email/email in the future
for things that actually matter. (This is
a prep commit for something along those
lines, kind of hard to explain the full
plan.)
The original/legacy emoji reactions endpoints made use of HTTP PUT and
didn't have an API that could correctly handle situations where the
emoji names change over time. We stopped using the legacy endpoints
some time ago, so we can remove them now.
This requires straightforward updates to older tests that were still
written against the legacy API.
Fixes#12940.
MigrationsTestCase is intentionally omitted from this, since migrations
tests are different in their nature and so whatever setUp()
ZulipTestCase may do in the future, MigrationsTestCase may not
necessarily want to replicate.
Given that we allow adding emoji reactions by only using the
emoji_name, we should offer the same possibility for removing
reactions to make the experience for API clients not require looking
up emoji codes.
Since this is an additional optional parameter, this also preserves
backward compatibility.
Complete, correct implementations of Zulip's emoji reactions API need
to send both emoji_code and emoji_name in order to add a reaction;
this is important for corner cases around clicking on a reaction in a
message that was first reacted to a year ago, when the emoji
name->code mappings have changed for the given code point in the
intervening time.
However, for folks building tools using the Zulip API, that corner
case is not particularly common; as a result, it makes sense to offer
an interface that allows adding a reaction by only specifying the
emoji name.
This is why the only field that needs to be required is emoji_name,
which can now be mapped to a single emoji. Both fields will be
necessary when "voting" an old reaction, but since we stil allow
specifying the two of them, these changes offer retrocompatibility.
This commit migrates realm emoji to be addressed by their `id` rather
than their name. This fixes a long standing issue which was causing
an error on uploading an emoji with same name as a deactivated realm
emoji.
Fixes: #6977.
Till now, we had been storing realm emoji's name in emoji code field
in reactions' model. This commit migrates it to store realm emoji's id.
It is a part of effort to migrate realm emojis to be referenced by their
id and not by name.
Inorder to provide more explicit error messages I have merged the
`emoji_code_is_valid()` and `emoji_name_is_valid()` functions into
`check_emoji_code_consistency()` and `check_emoji_name_consistency()`
respectively.
This endpoint will allow us to add/delete emoji reactions whose emoji
got renamed during various emoji infra changes. This was also a
required change for realm emoji migration.
This commit was tweaked significantly by tabbott for greater clarity
(with no changes to the actual logic).
On receiving a request for deleting a reaction, just check if such
a reaction exists or not. If it exists then just delete the reaction
otherwise send an error message that such a reaction doesn't exist.
It doesn't make sense to check whether an emoji name is valid or not.
This is the first part of a larger migration to convert Zulip's
reactions storage to something based on the codepoint, not the emoji
name that the user typed in, so that we don't need to worry about
changes in the names we're using breaking the emoji storage.
A deactivated realm emoji should neither be accepted further as a
reaction nor its further occurences in a message be rendered as an
emoji. However, all the old occurences should continue to render
normally.
- Add file_name field to `RealmEmoji` model and migration.
- Add emoji upload supporting to Upload backends.
- Add uploaded file processing to emoji views.
- Use emoji source url as based for display url.
- Change emoji form for image uploading.
- Fix back-end tests.
- Fix front-end tests.
- Add tests for emoji uploading.
Fixes#1134
We use the same strategy Zulip already uses for starred messages,
namely, creating a new UserMessage row with the "historical" flag set
(which basically means Zulip can ignore this row for most purposes
that use UserMessage rows). The historical flag is ignored, however,
in determining which users' browsers to notify about new reactions,
and thus the user will get to see the reaction appear when they click
a message (and any reactions other users later add, as well!).
There's still something of a race here, in that if some users react to
a message while the user is looking at the unsubscribed stream but
before the user reacts to that message, those reactions will not be
displayed to that user (so counts will be a bit lower, or something).
This race feels small enough to ignore for now.
Fixes#3345.
Whether the emoji is valid is already being checked elsewhere, and
this duplicate regular expression makes it harder to understand what's
going on with Zulip's validation of emoji.
Adding a reaction is now a PUT request to
/messages/<message_id>/emoji_reactions/<emoji_name>
Similarly, removing a reaction is now a DELETE request to
/messages/<message_id>/emoji_reactions/<emoji_name>
This commit changes the url and updates the views and tests.
This commit also adds a test for invalid emoji when removing reaction.
This commit adds support for removing reactions via DELETE requests to
the /reactions endpoint with parameters emoji_name and message_id.
The reaction is deleted from the database and a reaction event is sent
out with 'op' set to 'remove'.
Tests are added to check:
1. Removing a reaction that does not exist fails
2. When removing a reaction, the event payload and users are correct
This commit adds the following:
1. A reaction model that consists of a user, a message and an emoji that
are unique together (a user cannot react to a particular message more
than once with the same emoji)
2. A reaction event that looks like:
{
'type': 'reaction',
'op': 'add',
'message_id': 3,
'emoji_name': 'doge',
'user': {
'user_id': 1,
'email': 'hamlet@zulip.com',
'full_name': 'King Hamlet'
}
}
3. A new API endpoint, /reactions, that accepts POST requests to add a
reaction to a message
4. A migration to add the new model to the database
5. Tests that check that
(a) Invalid requests cannot be made
(b) The reaction event body contains all the info
(c) The reaction event is sent to the appropriate users
(d) Reacting more than once fails
It is still missing important features like removing emoji and
fetching them alongside messages.
Steve Howell
Gloria Elston
Mateusz Mandera
Anders Kaseorg
Yago González
Aditya Bansal
Harshit Bansal
Tim Abbott
Alena Volkova
rht
Umair Khan
neiljp (Neil Pilgrim)
Vishnu Ks
Rick Chern
Steve Howell
K.Kanakhin
Arpith Siromoney
Rafid Aslam