This commit corrects the test_change_stream_policy_requires_realm_admin
by setting the date_joined of user in the tests itself.
test_non_admin is added to avoid duplication of code.
Code is added for checking success on changing stream_post_policy
by admins.
This used to show a blank page. Considering that the links remain valid
only for 15 seconds it's important to show something more informative to
the user.
This is a prep commit for making use of same choices for
create_stream_policy and invite_to_stream_policy as both fields
have same set of choices.
This will be useful as we add other fields using these same types.
This commit replaces the WAITING _PERIOD with FULL_MEMBERS from
create_stream_policy and invite_to_stream_policy choices to
achieve consistency and making the variables more descriptive.
This simplifies the update_display_settings endpoint to use REQ for
validation, rather than custom if/else statements.
The test changes just take advantage of the now more consistent
syntax.
This changes the payload that is used
to populate `page_params` for the webapp,
as well as responses to the once-every-50-seconds
presence pings.
Now our dictionary of users only has these
two fields in the value:
- activity_timestamp
- idle_timestamp
Example data:
{
6: Object { idle_timestamp: 1585746028 },
7: Object { active_timestamp: 1585745774 },
8: Object { active_timestamp: 1585745578,
idle_timestamp: 1585745400}
}
We only send the slimmer type of payload
to clients that have set `slim_presence`
to True.
Note that this commit does not change the format
of the event data, which still looks like this:
{
website: {
client: 'website',
pushable: false,
status: 'active',
timestamp: 1585745225
}
}
This commit migrates zulip outging webhook payload to
/zulip-outgoing-webhook:post in OpenAPI.
Since this migrates the last payloads from api/fixtures.json to
OpenAPI, this commit removes api/fixtures.json file and the functions
accessing the file.
Tweaked by tabbott to further remove an unnecessary conditional.
The distinction between ValueError and TypeError
is not useful in these functions:
- extract_stream_indicator
- extract_private_recipients (or its callees)
These are always invoked in views to validate
user input.
When we use REQ to wrap the validators, any
Exception gets turned into a JsonableError, so
the distinction is not important.
And if we don't use REQ to wrap the validators,
the errors aren't caught.
Now we just let these functions directly produce
the desired end result for both codepaths.
Also, we now flag the error strings for translation.
This setting is being overridden by the frontend since the last
commit, and the security model is clearer and more robust if we don't
make it appear as though the markdown processor is handling this
issue.
Co-authored-by: Tim Abbott <tabbott@zulipchat.com>
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
Zulip's modal_link markdown feature has not been used since 2017; it
was a hack used for a 2013-era tutorial feature and was never used
outside that use case.
Unfortunately, it's sloppy implementation was exposed in the markdown
processor for all users, not just the tutorial use case.
More importantly, it was buggy, in that it did not validate the link
using the standard validation approach used by our other code
interacting with links.
The right solution is simply to remove it.
This makes it relatively easy for a system administrator to
temporarily override these values after a desktop app security
release that they want to ensure all of their users take.
We're not putting this in settings, since we don't want to encourage
accidental long-term overrides of these important-to-security values.
Previously, we only printed the test-case when we had an assertion error.
With this change, we also include timeout errors as well as any other
causes for failure.
We now have Hamlet, not Othello, send the message
to Othello's bot, since that's a more interesting
test and less likely to lead to a false positive.
And then we simplify the recipient check to avoid
the strange mypy mess as well as possible false
negatives.
When more than one outgoing webhook is configured,
the message which is send to the webhook bot passes
through finalize_payload function multiple times,
which mutated the message dict in a way that many keys
were lost from the dict obj.
This commit fixes that problem by having
`finalize_payload` return a shallow copy of the
incoming dict, instead of mutating it. We still
mutate dicts inside of `post_process_dicts`, though,
for performance reasons.
This was slightly modified by @showell to fix the
`test_both_codepaths` test that was added concurrently
to this work. (I used a slightly verbose style in the
tests to emphasize the transformation from `wide_dict`
to `narrow_dict`.)
I also removed a deepcopy call inside
`get_client_payload`, since we now no longer mutate
in `finalize_payload`.
Finally, I added some comments here and there.
For testing, I mostly protect against the root
cause of the bug happening again, by adding a line
to make sure that `sender_realm_id` does not get
wiped out from the "wide" dictionary.
A better test would exercise the actual code that
exposed the bug here by sending a message to a bot
with two or more services attached to it. I will
do that in a future commit.
Fixes#14384
We now validate the message data explicitly, rather
than comparing it to the event data. This protects
us from false positives where we were only validating
that the request data was a mutated version of the
event message data. (We'll have a commit soon that
fixes a mutation-related bug.)
This code is only used in one test, and having
the indirection of setUp partly obscured a
problem with the fact that our event message
is actually a wide dict that gets mutated
by `build_bot_request`. We'll fix that soon,
but this is a pure code move for now.
The `event` parameter is never used by `process_success`,
and eliminating it allows us to greatly simplify tests
that are just confusingly passing in events that are
totally ignored.
Migrate "call_on_each_event" from api/arguments.json to
/events:real-time in OpenAPI.
This is a bit of a hack, but it lets us eliminate this secondary
arguments.json file, which is probably worth it.
Tweaked by tabbott to fix various formatting issues in the original
documentation while I was looking at it.
We've had a bug for a while that if any ScheduledEmail objects get
created with the wrong email sender address, even after the sysadmin
corrects the problem, they'll still get errors because of the objects
stored with the wrong format.
We solve this by using FromAddress placeholders strings in
send_future_email function, so that ScheduledEmail objects end up
setting the final `from_address` value when mail is actually sent
using the setting in effect at that time.
Fixes#11008.
Overall, this change eliminates a lot of
optional parameters and conditionals, plus
some legacy logic related to caches.
For all the places we are just editing topics,
we now just call `check_topic` to see that
the topic got updated.
For places where the topic edit failed, we
just inline the checks that message still
has the old topic and content.
And then for successful **content** edits,
we now do a more rigorous, more sane check
that the messages are properly cached. The
old code here had evolved from 2013 into
something that didn't really make much sense
in the context of editing topics.
Now we are literally pulling data from the
cache and making sure it's valid, rather
than trying to poorly simulate the two
codepaths related to dispatching message
events and fetching messages. Some of the
history here was that when I introduced
`MessageDict` several years ago, I did a
lot of code sweeping and didn't analyze every
single test to make sure it's still valid,
plus some of the tests still had some value
for catching regressions. A recent commit
now gets us coverage on that a lot more
explicitly, rather than in passing.
See the comment in the test for a thorough explanation.
In brief, this test makes sure that the events codepath
for messages produces the same results as the fetch
codepath.
And this sets us up to simplify another test that kind
of poorly tried to do the same thing in passing. (In
fairness the test was really ancient and preceded a lot
of later work that we did here.)
This is a full-stack change:
- server
- JS code
- templates
It's all pretty simple--just use stream_id instead
of stream_name.
I am 99% sure we don't document this API nor use it
in mobile, so it should be a safe change.
The function `prepare_login_url_and_headers` returns a register
link for any value of `is_signup` unless it's not none.
This commit changes it to a boolean for that function and other
functions using it so that it becomes much clearer when a
register link will be returned.
Also, all occurrences of `is_signup='1'` are changed to
`is_signup=True` to make the code consistent with the above change.
This allows us to block use of the desktop app with insecure versions
(we simply fail to load the Zulip webapp at all, instead rendering an
error page).
For now we block only versions that are known to be both insecure and
not auto-updating, but we can easily adjust these parameters in the
future.
This improves the error handling for invalid values of the
propagate_mode parameter to our message editing endpoints.
Previously, invalid values would just work like change_one rather than
doing nothing.
type().__name__ is sufficient, and much readable than type(), so it's
better to use the former for keys.
We also make the classes consistent in forming the keys in the format
type(self).__name__:identifier and adjust logger.warning and statsd to
take advantage of that and simply log the key().
When a user in login flow using github auth chooses a email that is
not associated with an existing account, it leads to a "continue to
registration" choice. This cannot be tested with the earlier version
of `stage_two_of_registration`.
Also added the test.
Thanks to Mateusz Mandera for the solution.
Co-authored-by: Mateusz Mandera <mateusz.mandera@protonmail.com>
The previous model for GitHub authentication was as follows:
* If the user has only one verified email address, we'll generally just log them in to that account
* If the user has multiple verified email addresses, we will always
prompt them to pick which one to use, with the one registered as
"primary" in GitHub listed at the top.
This change fixes the situation for users going through a "login" flow
(not registration) where exactly one of the emails has an account in
the Zulip oragnization -- they should just be logged in.
Fixes part of #12638.
URLs for config errors were configured seperately for each error
which is better handled by having error name as argument in URL.
A new view `config_error_view` is added containing context for
each error that returns `config_error` page with the relevant
context.
Also fixed tests and some views in `auth.py` to be consistent with
changes.
This is a bit more rigorous than just
dereferencing the first element of
a list comprehension, as it will give a
ValueError if more matches are found than
the test was expecting.
We don't need `do_create_user` to send a partial
event here for bots. The only caller to `do_create_user`
that actually creates bots (apart from some tests that
just need data setup) is `add_bot_backend`, which
sends the more complete event including bot "extras"
like service info.
The modified event tests show the simplification
here (2 events instead of 3).
Also, the bot tests now use tuple unpacking, which
will force a ValueError if we duplicate events
again.
We now restrict emails on the zulip realm, and now
`email` and `delivery_email` will be different for
users.
This change should make it more likely to catch
errors where we leak delivery emails or use the
wrong field for lookups.
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.
We specifically give the existing user different
delivery_email and email addresses, to prevent false
positives during the test that checks that users
signing up with an already-existing email get
an error message.
(We also rename the test.)
I guess `test_classes` has 100% line coverage
enforcement, which is a bit tricky for error
handling.
This fixes that, as well as making the name
snake_case and improving the format of the
errors.
This test was using the anti-pattern of doing an
assertion inside a conditional.
I added the `findOne` helper to make it easier
to write robust tests for scenarios like this.
We had a bunch of ugly hacks to monkey patch things due to upstream
being temporarily unmaintained and not merging PRs. Now the project is
active again and the fixes have been merged and included in the latest
version - so we clean up all that code.
If I send a message from a normal Zulip client, it is
considered to be "read" by me. But if I send it via
an API program (using my human account), the message
is not immediately "read" by me.
Now we handle this correctly in `get_raw_unread_data`.
The symptom of this was that these messages would get
"stuck" in "Private Messages" narrows until the next
time you reloaded your app.
I've always thought of distributed teams as the place where Zulip
really shines over other tools, because chat is much more important in
that context.
And I've always been kinda unhappy with "most productive team chat" as
a line.
There's a lot more we should do here, but this is a start.
We now have this API...
If you really just need to log in
and not do anything with the actual
user:
self.login('hamlet')
If you're gonna use the user in the
rest of the test:
hamlet = self.example_user('hamlet')
self.login_user(hamlet)
If you are specifically testing
email/password logins (used only in 4 places):
self.login_by_email(email, password)
And for failures uses this (used twice):
self.assert_login_failure(email)
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`.
We want a clean codepath for the vast majority
of cases of using api_get/api_post, which now
uses email and which we'll soon convert to
accepting `user` as a parameter.
These apis that take two different types of
values for the same parameter make sweeps
like this kinda painful, and they're pretty
easy to avoid by extracting helpers to do
the actual common tasks. So, for example,
here I still keep a common method to
actually encode the credentials (since
the whole encode/decode business is an
annoying detail that you don't want to fix
in two places):
def encode_credentials(self, identifier: str, api_key: str) -> str:
"""
identifier: Can be an email or a remote server uuid.
"""
credentials = "%s:%s" % (identifier, api_key)
return 'Basic ' + base64.b64encode(credentials.encode('utf-8')).decode('utf-8')
But then the rest of the code has two separate
codepaths.
And for the uuid functions, we no longer have
crufty references to realm. (In fairness, realm
will also go away when we introduce users.)
For the `is_remote_server` helper, I just inlined
it, since it's now only needed in one place, and the
name didn't make total sense anyway, plus it wasn't
a super robust check. In context, it's easier
just to use a comment now to say what we're doing:
# If `role` doesn't look like an email, it might be a uuid.
if settings.ZILENCER_ENABLED and role is not None and '@' not in role:
# do stuff
Instead of trying to set the _requestor_for_logs attribute in all the
relevant places, we try to use request.user when possible (that will be
when it's a UserProfile or RemoteZulipServer as of now). In other
places, we set _requestor_for_logs to avoid manually editing the
request.user attribute, as it should mostly be left for Django to manage
it.
In places where we remove the "request._requestor_for_logs = ..." line,
it is clearly implied by the previous code (or the current surrounding
code) that request.user is of the correct type.
This refactors get_members_backend to return user data of a single
user in the form of a dictionary (earlier being a list with a single
dictionary).
This also refactors it to return the data with an appropriate key
(inside a dictionary), "user" or "members", according to the type of
data being returned.
Tweaked by tabbott to use somewhat less opaque code and simple OpenAPI
descriptions.
Previously, get_client_name was responsible for both parsing the
User-Agent data as well as handling the override behavior that we want
to use "website" rather than "Mozilla" as the key for the Client object.
Now, it's just responsible for User-Agent, and the override behavior
is entirely within process_client (the function concerned with Client
objects).
This has the side effect of changing what `Client` object we'll use
for HTTP requests to /json/ endpoints that set the `client` attribute.
I think that's in line with our intent -- we only have a use case for
API clients overriding the User-Agent parsing (that feature is a
workaround for situations where the third party may not control HTTP
headers but does control the HTTP request payload).
This loses test coverage on the `request.GET['client']` code path; I
disable that for now since we don't have a real use for that behavior.
(We may want to change that logic to have Client recognize individual
browsers; doing so requires first using a better User-Agent parsing
library).
Part of #14067.
The "sender" property in `send_message_backend` is meant to only do
something when doing Zephyr mirroring (or similar). We should help
clients behave correctly by banning this property in requests that are
not specifically requesting mirroring behavior.
This commit requires changes to a number of tests that incorrectly
passed this parameter or didn't use the right setup for mirroring.
The special Zephyr mirroring logic is only intended to be used via the
API, so this sets up a more effective test. It also allows us to
remove certain Client parsing logic for the /json/ views using session
authentication.
The email domain restriction to @zulip.com is annoying in development
environment when trying to test sign up. For consistency, it's best to
have tests use the same default, and the tests that require domain
restriction can be adjusted to set that configuration up for themselves
explicitly.
This uses the better, modern, user ID based API for sending messages
internally in the test suite, something that's convenient to do as a
follow-up to the migration to pass UserProfile objects to these
functions.
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.)
This extends our email address visibility settings to deny access to
user email addresses even to organization administrators.
At the moment, they can of course change the setting (which leaves an
audit trail), but in the future only organization owners will be able
to change that setting.
While we're at this, we rewrite the settings_data.js test to cover all
the cases in a more consistent way.
Fixes#14111.
We were using `code` to pass around messages.
The `code` field is designed to be a code, not
a human-readable message.
It's possible that we don't actually need two
flavors of messages for these type of validations,
but I didn't want to change that yet.
We **definitely** don't need to put two types of
message in the exception, so I fix that. Instead,
I just have the caller ask what level of detail
it needs.
I added a non-verbose message for the case of
system bots.
I removed the non-translated version of the message
for deactivated accounts, which didn't have test
coverage and is slightly more prone to leaking
email info that we don't want to leak.
In the prep commits leading up to this, we split
out two new helpers:
validate_email_is_valid
get_errors_for_new_emails
Now when we validate invites we use two separate
loops to filter our emails.
Note that the two extracted functions map to two
of the data structures that used to be handled
in a single loop, and now we break them out:
errors = validate_email_is_valid
skipped = get_errors_for_new_emails
The first loop checks that emails are even valid
to begin with.
The second loop finds out whether emails are already
in use.
The second loop takes advantage of this helper:
get_errors_for_new_emails
The second helper can query all potential new emails
with a single round trip to the database.
This reduces our query count.
We are trying to kill off `validate_email`, so
we no longer call it from these tests.
These tests are already kind of low-level in
nature, so testing the more specific helpers
here should be fine.
Note that we also make the third parameter
to `validate_email` non-optional in this commit,
to preserve 100% coverage. This is really just
refactoring noise--we will soon eliminate the
entire function, but I didn't want to do everything
in a huge commit.
This has two goals:
- sets up a future commit to bulk-validate
emails
- the extracted function is more simple,
since it just has errors, and no codes
or deactivated flags
This commit leaves us in a somewhat funny
intermediate state where we have
`action.validate_email` being a glorified
two-line function with strange parameters,
but subsequent commits will clean this up:
- we will eliminate validate_email
- we will move most of the guts of its
other callee to lib/email_validation.py
To be clear, the code is correct here, just
kinda in an ugly, temporarily-disorganized
intermediate state.
We now use the `get_realm_email_validator()`
helper to build an email validator outside
the loop of emails in our invite list.
This allows us to perform RealmDomain queries
only once per request, instead of once per
email.
Without the fix here, you will get an exception
similar to below if you try to invite one of the
cross realm bots. (The actual exception is
a bit different due to some rebasing on my branch.)
File "/home/zulipdev/zulip/zerver/lib/request.py", line 368, in _wrapped_view_func
return view_func(request, *args, **kwargs)
File "/home/zulipdev/zulip/zerver/views/invite.py", line 49, in invite_users_backend
do_invite_users(user_profile, invitee_emails, streams, invite_as)
File "/home/zulipdev/zulip/zerver/lib/actions.py", line 5153, in do_invite_users
email_error, email_skipped, deactivated = validate_email(user_profile, email)
File "/home/zulipdev/zulip/zerver/lib/actions.py", line 5069, in validate_email
return None, (error.code), (error.params['deactivated'])
TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not subscriptable
Obviously, you shouldn't try to invite a cross
realm bot to your realm, but we want a reasonable
error message.
RESOLUTION:
Populate the `code` parameter for `ValidationError`.
BACKGROUND:
Most callers to `validate_email_for_realm` simply catch
the `ValidationError` and then report a more generic error.
That's also what `do_invite_users` does, but it has the
somewhat convoluted codepath through `validate_email`
that triggers this code:
try:
validate_email_for_realm(user_profile.realm, email)
except ValidationError as error:
return None, (error.code), (error.params['deactivated'])
The way that we're using the `code` parameter for
`ValidationError` feels hacky to me. The intention
behind `code` is to provide a descriptive error to
calling code, and it's not intended for humans, and
it feels strange that we actually translate this in
other places. Here are the Django docs:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.0/ref/forms/validation/
And then here's an example of us actually translating
a code (not part of this commit, just providing context):
raise ValidationError(_('%s already has an account') %
(email,), code = _("Already has an account."),
params={'deactivated': False})
Those codes eventually get put into InvitationError, which
inherits from JsonableError, and we do actually display
these errors in the webapp:
if skipped and len(skipped) == len(invitee_emails):
# All e-mails were skipped, so we didn't actually invite anyone.
raise InvitationError(_("We weren't able to invite anyone."),
skipped, sent_invitations=False)
I will try to untangle this somewhat in upcoming commits.
We allow folks to invite emails that are
associated with a mirror_dummy account.
We had a similar test already for registration,
but not invites.
This logic typically affects MIT realms in the
real world, but the logic should apply to any
realm, so I use accounts from the zulip realm
for convenient testing. (For example, we might
run an IRC mirror for a non-MIT account.)
I use a range here because there's some leak
from another test that causes the count to
vary. Once we get this a bit more under control,
we should be able to analyze the leak better.
The substantive improvement here is to use
a strange casing for Hamlet's email, which
will prevent future casing bugs.
I also log in as Cordelia to prevent confusion
that the test has something to do with
inviting yourself. It's more typical for
somebody to invite another person to a realm
(not realizing they're already there).
I also made two readability tweaks.
Previously, the input:
====================
- One
- Two
Two continued
====================
Would produce the same output as:
====================
- One
- Two
```
Two continued
```
====================
This was because our CodeBlockProcessor had a higher priority than
the ListIndentProcessor. This issue was discussed here:
https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/stream/9-issues/topic/continuation.20paragraphs.20in.20list.20items.
/delete_topic endpoint could be used to request the deletion of a topic,
that would cause do_delete_messages to be called with an empty set in
these cases:
1. Requesting deletion of an empty stream.
2. Requesting deletion of a topic in a private stream with history not
public to subscribers, if the requesting admin doesn't have access to
any of the messages in that topic.
We were only checking error handling before, not
the happy path. The structure of the code
made it so that we effectively tested most of the
logic for this use case (since all the other flags
are sort of just filters on top of this), but
obviously we want explicit coverage here. Also,
we weren't testing the is-admin-but-not-api-super-user
error checking until this commit.
For historical reasons we were creating Recipient
objects at some point in the typing-notifications
codepath. Now we just work with UserProfiles.
This removes some queries, as indicated by
the change to `len(queries)` in a couple of the
tests.
The one subtle thing that changes here is huddles.
If user 10 sends a typing notification that they
are talking to users 20 and 30, there might not
actually be a huddle for users 10/20/30, but
we were actually creating huddles on the fly!
There is no need to create huddles just for
typing notifications, since we don't even
share huddle ids with our clients. The clients
just infer the huddles.
Some of the code that gets killed off here as
somewhat "collateral damage" is some
defensive code related to formerly supporting streams
in typing indicators. The support for streams
was killed off almost as soon as we released
the feature, and the codepath is pretty clearly
user-centric at this point.
The only clients that should use the typing
indicators endpoint are our internal clients,
and they should send a JSON-formatted list
of user_ids.
Unfortunately, we still have some older versions
of mobile that still send emails.
In this commit we fix non-user-facing things
like docs and tests to promote the user_ids
interface that has existed since about version
2.0 of the server.
One annoyance is that we documented the
typing endpoint with emails, instead of the
more modern user_ids, which may have delayed
mobile converting to user_ids (and which
certainly caused confusion). It's trivial
to update the docs, but we need to short
circuit one assertion in the openapi tests.
We also clean up the test structure for the
typing tests:
TypingHappyPathTest.test_start_to_another_user
TypingHappyPathTest.test_start_to_multiple_recipients
TypingHappyPathTest.test_start_to_self
TypingHappyPathTest.test_start_to_single_recipient
TypingHappyPathTest.test_stop_to_another_user
TypingHappyPathTest.test_stop_to_self
TypingValidateOperatorTest.test_invalid_parameter
TypingValidateOperatorTest.test_missing_parameter
TypingValidateUsersTest.test_argument_to_is_not_valid_json
TypingValidateUsersTest.test_bogus_user_id
TypingValidateUsersTest.test_empty_array
TypingValidateUsersTest.test_missing_recipient
TypingValidationHelpersTest.test_recipient_for_user_ids
TypingValidationHelpersTest.test_recipient_for_user_ids_non_existent_id
TypingLegacyMobileSupportTest.test_legacy_email_interface
Users who are using ZulipDesktop or haven't managed to auto-update to
ZulipElectron should be strongly encouraged to upgrade.
We'll likely want to move to something even stricter that blocks
loading the app at all, but this is a good start.
This field wasn't accessed by any clients and was a less robust
version of the user_id field. Any client hoping to be interested in
who did message edits should be able to handle working with user IDs
rather than email addresses.
We should not need so many queries here,
although a couple of the queries are just
standard things that apply to all requests.
I will reduce the number of queries in a
later commit.
This is mostly refactoring, but we also prevent a new
type of value error (list of non-int-or-string). The
new test code helps enforce that.
Cleanup includes:
- Use early-exit for email case.
- Rename helpers to get_validate_*.
- Avoid clumsy rebuilding of lists in helpers.
- Avoid the confusing `recipient` name (which
can be confused with the model by the same
name).
- Just delegate duplicate-id/email-removal to
the helpers.
The cleaner structure allows us to elminate a couple
mypy workarounds.
sahil839
Mateusz Mandera
Tim Abbott
Steve Howell
shubhamgupta2956
Anders Kaseorg
Rohitt Vashishtha
Udit107710
Stefan Weil
arpit551
Dinesh
Dinesh
akashaviator