The previous function was poorly named, asked for a
Realm object when realm_id sufficed, and returned a
tuple of strings that had different semantics.
I also avoid calling it duplicate times in a couple
places, although it was probably rarely the case that
both invocations actually happened if upstream
validations were working.
Note that there is a TypedDict called EmojiInfo, so I
chose EmojiData here. Perhaps a better name would be
TinyEmojiData or something.
I also simplify the reaction tests with a verify
helper.
Adds request as a parameter to json_success as a refactor towards
making `ignored_parameters_unsupported` functionality available
for all API endpoints.
Also, removes any data parameters that are an empty dict or
a dict with the generic success response values.
This locks the message row while a reaction is being added/removed,
which will handle race conditions caused by deleting the message
at the same time.
We make sure that events work happens outside the transaction,
so that in case there's some problem with the queue processor, the
locks aren't held for too long.
As a nice side-effect, we also handle race conditions from double
adding reactions, because once the message is locked, a duplicate
request will wait till the earlier transaction commits, and hence
will not throw `IntegrityErrors`s (rather, will be handled in our
safety check in the /views code itself), which earlier had to be
handled explicitly.
django.utils.translation.ugettext is a deprecated alias of
django.utils.translation.gettext as of Django 3.0, and will be removed
in Django 4.0.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Fixes#2665.
Regenerated by tabbott with `lint --fix` after a rebase and change in
parameters.
Note from tabbott: In a few cases, this converts technical debt in the
form of unsorted imports into different technical debt in the form of
our largest files having very long, ugly import sequences at the
start. I expect this change will increase pressure for us to split
those files, which isn't a bad thing.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
This changes add_reaction in zerver.views.reactions to allow
calling POST ../messages/{message_id}/reactions api endpoint with
emoji_name only, even in the case of a custom emoji.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.