I remember being really confused by this function in the past, and I finally
figured it out. It should be removed, and the dev_url added by
00-realm-creation should call a function that just gets the confirmation_key
from outbox like all of the backend tests, but until then this comment
should help.
This change:
* Prevents weird potential attacks like taking a valid confirmation link
(say an unsubscribe link), and putting it into the URL of a multiuse
invite link. I don't know of any such attacks one could do right now, but
reasoning about it is complicated.
* Makes the code easier to read, and in the case of confirmation/views.py,
exposes something that needed refactoring anyway (USER_REGISTRATION and
INVITATION should have different endpoints, and both of those endpoints
should be in zerver/views/registration, not this file).
This test helper method duplicated a bunch of logic in
`zerver/worker/queue_processors.py` in a specialized fashion for the
tests. Now that we're using `call_consume_in_tests` in this code
path, we don't need it.
Before this commit, ResponseMock() was initialized
with a data attribute, which isn't used in the tests
and does not occur in the outgoing webhook code.
The control panel on the Google side doesn't seem to match the
instructions we have; it looks pretty 2017 to me, so I imagine
it's had a redesign since the instructions were written.
Also, in dev, EXTERNAL_HOST is now a port on zulipdev.com, not on
localhost.
Update these instructions for those developments, and edit lightly.
In dev, recommend setting in `dev_settings` instead of in
`prod_settings_template`; that feels to me a little more reflective of
the actual intent, and the effect should be equivalent.
In some minutes of searching yesterday afternoon on the docs site,
I couldn't find docs on how to set up our OAuth integrations for
the dev environment -- even though I was pretty sure they should
be there somewhere, because I'd just been told that. Wasn't until
I considered the problem fresh today, and grepped the docs source
instead, that I found them.
So, move them to a separate page so they're in the nav.
The main limitation of this version is that it's controlled entirely
from settings, with nothing in the database and no web UI or even
management command to control it. That makes it a bit more of a
burden for the server admins than it'd ideally be, but that's fine
for now.
Relatedly, the web flow for realm creation still requires choosing a
subdomain even if the realm is destined to live at an alias domain.
Specific to the dev environment, there is an annoying quirk: the
special dev login flow doesn't work on a REALM_HOSTS realm. Also,
in this version the `add_new_realm` and `add_new_user` management
commands, which are intended for use in development environments only,
don't support this feature.
In manual testing, I've confirmed that a REALM_HOSTS realm works for
signup and login, with email/password, Google SSO, or GitHub SSO.
Most of that was in dev; I used zulipstaging.com to also test
* logging in with email and password;
* logging in with Google SSO... far enough to correctly determine
that my email address is associated with some other realm.
This means one fewer thing the admin typically needs to read, absorb,
and make a decision about at install time.
The one way this change could hypothetically cause trouble is if the
admin wants to keep subdomains of EXTERNAL_HOST out of ALLOWED_HOSTS.
But while the subdomains often won't exist as domain names, it's hard
to imagine the situation in which they would exist but be under
someone else's control, or be doing something other than serving
Zulip realms.
It's kind of awkward that this takes the scheme-relative URL -- either
the full URL, or maybe just the host, would make more sense. But on a
bit of study of the plugin's source, I can't convince myself that it
won't break if given the full URL with the scheme. (See a code
comment thread in #7116.) So leave the substance as is, pending the
plugin itself getting some cleanup, but do fix the sentence's English
grammar since we're looking at it.
The original PR to allow generic bots to be mentioned had
some merge issues that we detected about a week after the
fact. This commit restores the logic from the original PR.
The reason we didn't detect this bug earlier is that the
merge issues didn't break any existing behavior. Instead,
they made it so that only UserMessage rows got written for
bots, but no events were being set. The part of the commit
that got lost is restored here, so now events get sent as
well.
Thanks to @derAnfaenger for reporting this and being patient
as we tracked it down.
Fixes#7140
On stream names that don’t quite fit, we’ll add overflow ellipsis to
them. It appears we already did this on mobile in a sub-optimal way so
we can remove that media query with preference to the new, better
styling.
This allows a user to scroll all the way down on the sidebar and the
main panel in the settings page on narrow height windows by removing
the min-height specification and making the “Log out” line in the
sidebar become statically positioned at shorter heights.
Fixes: #7251.
This adds the data model and bugdown support for the new UserGroup
mention feature.
Before it'll be fully operational, we'll still need:
* A backend API for making these.
* A UI for interacting with that API.
* Typeahead on the frontend.
* CSS to make them look pretty and see who's in them.
Cynthia Lin
rht
Rishi Gupta
akashnimare
Tim Abbott
derAnfaenger
Greg Price
Steve Howell
Eeshan Garg
Brock Whittaker
Harshit Bansal
Umair Khan
Sampriti Panda
sandeepsajan0