Make sure that we use the max password length defined in
RegistrationForm.MAX_PASSWORD_LENGTH when validating the
password for the password reset form.
Fixes#15087.
Signed-off-by: Hemanth V. Alluri <hdrive1999@gmail.com>
Previously, we had to fiddle with the generated HTML to update
individual values. Now, we can simply ask the widget to rerender
the row that we updated.
This is done by passing an html_selector function that returns
a selector for the rendered item.
If:
- we do not provide html_selector function
- item is not currently rendered
- new html is not a string.
then the render_item() call is a noop.
We do not shift much of the validation logic here just
yet. This function has been declared at the top of the
file to act as usage docs for the widget as well, in
terms of what combinations of opts are valid and what
are not.
We remove the "GROUP PMs" section that used
to be in the lower right sidebar.
Most of this is straightforward code removal.
A couple quick notes:
- The message fetching code now just
calls `huddle_data.process_loaded_messages`,
which we still need for search suggestions.
We removed `activity.process_loaded_messages`.
- The `huddle_data.process_loaded_messages`
function no longer needs to return `need_resize`.
- In `resize.js` we now just calculate
`res.buddy_list_wrapper_max_height` directly
from `usable_height`.
This fixes the calculation for how far from the
top of the viewport we think #right_sidebar's
top is. To fully explain this commit requires
some background info.
Normally `#right-sidebar` has 50px of top margin
and 0px of top padding. And our `resize.js`
calculations have been accurate for the normal
case.
But when you are in the so-called `.expanded` mode
(i.e. when you're in a narrow window) we split up the
50px as follows:
- 40px margin
- 10px padding
Why don't I make the CSS just be more consistent here?
- If you go to 50px in the "expanded" mode
you mostly cover up the right scrollbar,
except for the 10px gutter that is below
the 40px-tall `.header` section. To fully
cover it we apparently want the padding;
otherwise you see a small, unusable remnant
of the scrollbar which just looks funny.
- If we were to make the "regular" right sidebar
just always have the 40/10 split, then we
would start to diverge from the left sidebar,
which is currently 50/0 as well.
- If we went to make both the left and the right
sidebars 40/10 split, well, that's just an
even riskier change.
So instead I fix the resize calculation:
I just calculate the actual `top` position.
Is any of this actually user-facing?
Yes. Now if a user is a narrow window and
they open the buddy list, we will make
the buddy list 10px smaller to account for
the padding. This makes it less likely for
the invite link to get squeezed out.
We'll use this in the next commit.
Note that there's a minor change in the order
in which we apply new heights--we now
do sidebars before bottom whitespace.
We had a bunch of places where we
were calling `resize.resize_bottom_whitespace`
with no arguments, which has been a no-op
since the below commit that removed support
for our `autoscroll_forever` option:
fa44d2ea69
With the `autoscroll_forever` options things
like opening/closing the compose box could
alter how much bottom whitespace you'd want,
but we stopped supporting that feature in
2017.
Since then bottom_whitespace has just always
been 40% of the viewport size. So we only need
to change it on actual resize events.
It's worth noting that we still call
`resize_bottom_whitespace` indirectly in many
places, via `resize_page_components`, and
the latter actually causes
`resize_bottom_whitespace` to do real work,
but that work is redundant for most of those
codepaths, since they're not triggered by
changes to the viewport. So there are other
opportunities for cleanup.
The `buddy_list_wrapper` has zeros margins, so it's
just noise in the current calculations. You can
verify this pretty easily with console statements,
as well as looking at the code. I tried it with
various permutations of narrow windows and display
settings.
The header is 40px tall, with a 10px gutter
below it, which means the top of our sidebars
are 50px from the top of the viewport.
Now all the places that share these values
use `$header_right` and related values.
This is pretty easy to test out by just doubling
or tripling the two numbers at the top of the
file.
The section for `@media (max-width: 500px)` seems
to have its own smaller values for things like
the `height` of `.header`, so I left it alone.
Fixes#14962
* codecov needs `.coverage` file in the pwd to upload coverage
results.
* concurrency='multiprocessing' forces `.coverage` file to have a
data_suffix, we explicity set it to "" for the file to have no suffix.
Filed issue as https://github.com/nedbat/coveragepy/issues/989
Trigger realm icon upload by clicking on realm icon element itself
rather than having a big upload button and to match our user avatar UI.
Added new spinner over the icon element itself to show while
uploading realm icon.
The bug this was working around does not affect our current toolchain,
as confirmed by grepping through the minified output.
(Also, this linter rule only matched calc(x + y) with two arguments
and we were already using calc($far_left_gutter_size + $left_col_size
+ 4px).)
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
This commit changes do_change_user_role to support adding or removing
the realm owner status of user and sending an event.
We also extend the existing test for do_change_user_role to do a bit
more validation to confirm the audit log records all values of role.
The new realm_owner role is added as option for role field in
UserProfile model and is_realm_owner is added as property for the user
profile.
Aside from some basic tests validating the logic, this has no effect
as users cannot end up with set as realm owners.
If the key paramenter on POST isn't correct we won't be
able to find the confirmation object, which will lead to
an exception. To deal with it more gracefully, we are
catching the exception and redirecting to the
confirmation_link_expired_error page.
If a user receives more than one invite to join a
realm, after that user registers, all the remaining
invitations should be revoked, preventing them to be
listed in active invitations on admin panel.
To do this, we added a new prereg_user status,
STATUS_REVOKED.
We also added a confirmation_link_expired_error page
in case the user tries click on a revoked invitaion.
This page has a link to login page.
Fixes: #12629
Co-authored-by: Arunika <arunikayadav42@gmail.com>
This tests if a user, that is already registered, is
redirected to the login page when they click on an
invitation.
Co-authored-by: Arunika <arunikayadav42@gmail.com>
Tests attached a UserProfile to confirmation objects,
which is not very valid as this is the only place
where this is done. Now we attach PreregUser to
the confirmation object, making the tests correct.
Co-authored-by: Arunika <arunikayadav42@gmail.com>
This commit has us piggy back the conditional for narrow_description
off of the conditional for sub_count, the reason for this approach is
that "narrow_description" needs to handle four unique cases:
- The stream exists and has a description.
- The stream exists and does not have a description.
- The stream does not exist and we must render appropriate text.
- We are not in a stream narrow and the span should not be rendered.
By piggy backing off of sub count we can get the first and last case,
with the inner conditional (on rendered_narrow_description) handling
the second case and the tab_bar.js passing appropriate values to the
template to handle the third case.
This unfortunately makes the template more brittle such that breakage
of the subcount can cause breakage (non rendering) of the description
as well.
Since we are doing a assert call checking a url without no page.waitForSelector
or similar calls, we add this to avoid flakes where the assert is called
when we are in process of navigation to the page. Also, we use Promise.all
here, and call page.waitForNavigation first, to avoid race conditions where
form is submitted quickly and navigation occurs and then we are stuck waiting
for a navigation. There were no flakes in the CI related to this issue, but
I expect someone with a slow hardware would probably stumble upto this in future.
We were missing the step for clicking the checkbox to show the subdomain
input field. There was a flake because of this issue in CI where the
"testsubdomain" input was getting typed into the name field. This fixes
that flake.
There were two reason there were flakes in login tests. One problem was
that the assert call for checking that the login page url was happening
too early in rare cases. To fix this issue we wait for email input field
element in the login page. The second issue was the sometimes the url was
/login/ instead of /accounts/login/. The time between the redirect were
super close here too (around ~10ms) so I am suprised this didn't occur flake
locally more often.
Server logs that show the redirect:
2020-05-26 18:55:27.065 INFO [zr] 127.0.0.1 GET 200 36ms (db: 5ms/2q) (+start: 14ms) /accounts/login/ (unauth@zulip via ?)
2020-05-26 18:55:27.074 INFO [zr] 127.0.0.1 GET 200 28ms (db: 3ms/2q) (+start: 23ms) /login/ (unauth@zulip via ?)
To take a screenshot on failure where we have our common error
handling code in common.run_test method we need to have access to
the Page instance. Currently, we create a new Page in the test method
we pass into run_test, so we pass in a new Page instance to that method
so the test and the run_test method have access to the same Page. And,
then we take a screenshot on failure. It will be saved as `failure-${num}`
in var/puppeteer directory.
Hemanth V. Alluri
Rohitt Vashishtha
Mateusz Mandera
Tim Abbott
Mateusz Mandera
Steve Howell
Aman Agrawal
jagansivam28
SiddharthVarshney
Anders Kaseorg
sahil839
clarammdantas
Bhanu Gupta
YashRE42
Alex Vandiver
orientor
Priyank Patel