This commit completely switches us over to using a
dedicated model called MutedTopic to track which topics
a user has muted.
This includes the necessary migrations to create the
table and populate it from legacy data in UserProfile.
A subsequent commit will actually remove the old field
in UserProfile.
This is mostly pure code extraction.
It also removes some dead code in update_muted_topic, where
were updating muted_topics spuriously before calling
do_update_muted_topic.
For filters like has:link, where the web app doesn't necessarily
want to guess whether incoming messages meet the criteria of the
filter, the server is asked to query rows that match the query.
Usually these queries are search queries, which have fields for
content_matches and subject_matches. Our logic was handling those
correctly.
Non-search queries were throwing an exception related to tuple
unpacking. Now we recognize when those fields are absent and
do the proper thing.
There are probably situations where the web app should stop hitting
this endpoint and just use its own filters. We are making the most
defensive fix first.
Fixes#6118
Before this change, server searches for both
`is:mentioned` and `is:alerted` would return all messages
where the user is specifically mentioned (but not
at-all mentions).
Now we follow the JS semantics:
is:mentioned -- all mentions, including wildcards
is:alerted -- has an alert word
Here is one relevant JS snippet:
} else if (operand === 'mentioned') {
return message.mentioned;
} else if (operand === 'alerted') {
return message.alerted;
And here you see that `mentioned` is OR'ed over both mention flags:
message.mentioned = convert_flag('mentioned') || convert_flag('wildcard_mentioned');
The `alerted` flag on the JS side is a simple mapping:
message.alerted = convert_flag('has_alert_word');
Fixes#5020
We apparently were using the default of num_before=1, not
num_before=0, which meant that if the very last randomly generated
message was one by cordelia mentioning lunch,
test_get_messages_with_search would fail because there were actually 3
matches.
We recently changed the populate_db data set to include more variable
message content, which happened to include the possibility of the word
"lunch" appearing in the test messages. This caused occasional
failures of the search tests that looked for messages containing
"lunch" starting at the beginning of time, not the beginning of the
test.
This completes the major endpoint migrations to eliminate legacy API
endpoints from Zulip.
There's a few other things that will happen naturally, so I believe
this fixes#611.
The example_user() function is specifically designed for
AARON, hamlet, cordelia, and friends, and it allows a concise
way of using their built-in user profiles. Eventually, the
widespread use of example_user() should help us with refactorings
such as moving the tests users out of the "zulip.com" realm
and deprecating get_user_profile_by_email.
This is a better solution to the problem of how _pg_re_escape should
handle the null character. There's really no good reason to have a
null character in a stream name.
textsearch based full text search doesn't match text in link tag but
PGroonga based full text search can match text in link tag.
Without this change, highlighting text in link tag generates broken
HTML.
Due to Pgroonga regression, there is a difference in search
result between Travis and development env due to which one of
our tests fails. This commit makes sure that the test passes
for both strings till the Pgroonga bug is resolved.
Like many rare-case code with new tests, it turns out that the logic
for handling null characters in our Zephyr postgres query escaping
never worked, in multiple ways. First, it always changed the second
character in s, not the current one being inspected, and second, the
value it replaced it with was no the correct postgres escape of the
null byte. We fix this and add tests.
This completes the effort to get zerver/views/messages.py to 100%
test coverage.
Fixes#1006.
This arguably regresses the Zephyr experience, in that we no longer
consider 'foo.d.d.d.d.d' to be something that gets narrowed in with
the rest, but that's a pretty rare use case anyway.
In practice, using that many '.d's anyway only happens a few times a
year.