I have no idea why this started failing just now, but the test was
written without a proper wait in between actions, and fixing that
fixes the failure I'd been seeing.
We consistently either pass a `then_select_id` into narrow.activate,
or were using the select_first_unread option. Now, we just compute
select_first_unread based on the value of then_select_id.
In the very early days of Zulip, we didn't have unread counts; just
the pointer, and the correct behavior when opening a new tab was to
place you near the pointer. That doesn't make any sense now that we
do have unread counts, and this corner case has been a wart for a long
time.
This commit does the main behavior change here. However, there's a
bug we need to fix, where we might end up trying to pre-render a view
of the narrow based on the `all_msg_list` data before `all_msg_list`
is caught up). We need to fix that bug before we can merge this; it
should be possible to determine that using `FetchStatus` on
`all_msg_list`, or with better performance by using the `unread_msgs`
structure to determine whether the message we should be selecting is
present locally.
Fixes#789.
Fixes#9070.
Apparently, we were incorrectly passing through something related to
opts.use_initial_narrow_pointer as the value for `use_first_anchor`.
If you read the logic in narrow.js carefully,
use_initial_narrow_pointer was unconditionally false.
The correct value for this attribute is when we're trying to narrow to
the first unread message in a given context. There are two things to
check:
* then_select_id is -1; i.e. we don't have a specific message ID we're
trying to narrow around.
* select_first_unread is True, i.e. we're trying to narrow to the
first unread message.
A bit more work should allow us to get rid of the second condition,
but I'm not quite confident enough to do that yet.
This prevents us from using const in our JS code, with exceptions
for test code and the portico. Hopefully this is just a temporary
rule until we make our pipelines with work with ES6.
I tried to prevent "let", but that was too noisy.
This adjusts the one false-negative case of using const in a comment.
This does a few things:
* removes some unnecessary setup
* puts some jQuery setup closer to where it's needed
* renames some variables
* adds an assertion about highlighting
This change makes a common code path for these two operations:
* clicking on a user
* hitting enter when a user is highlighted
The newer codepath, for the enter key, had some differences that
were just confusing. For example, there's no need to open the
compose box, since that's already handled by the narrowing code.
For possibly dubious reasons, I let each handler still call
popovers.hide_all() on its own, since it makes the code a bit
more consistent with existing code patterns.
If we would have more than 600 people in a buddy list, it's kind of
cumbersome to scroll through it, and it's also expensive to render
it (short of doing progressive rendering, which adds a lot of
complexity).
So, as a short term measure, we filter out offline users whenever the
list would exceed 600 users. Note that if you are doing a search that
narrows to fewer 600 users, the offline users will appear again.
The main change here is to send a proper confirmation link to the
frontend in the `confirm_continue_registration` code path even if the
user didn't request signup, so that we don't need to re-authenticate
the user's control over their email address in that flow.
This also lets us delete some now-unnecessary code: The
`invalid_email` case is now handled by HomepageForm.is_valid(), which
has nice error handling, so we no longer need logic in the context
computation or template for `confirm_continue_registration` for the
corner case where the user somehow has an invalid email address
authenticated.
We split one GitHub auth backend test to now cover both corner cases
(invalid email for realm, and valid email for realm), and rewrite the
Google auth test for this code path as well.
Fixes#5895.
This test class is basically a poor version of the end-to-end tests
that we have in `test_auth_backends.py`, and didn't really add any
value other than making it difficult to refactor.
By moving all of the logic related to the is_signup flag into
maybe_send_to_registration, we make the login_or_register_remote_user
function quite clean and readable.
The next step is to make maybe_send_to_registration less of a
disaster.
The code in maybe_send_to_registration incorrectly used the
`get_realm_from_request` function to fetch the subdomain. This usage
was incorrect in a way that should have been irrelevant, because that
function only differs if there's a logged-in user, and in this code
path, a user is never logged in (it's the code path for logged-out
users trying to sign up).
This this bug could confuse unit tests that might run with a logged-in
client session. This made it possible for several of our GitHub auth
tests to have a totally invalid subdomain value (the root domain).
Fixing that bug in the tests, in turn, let us delete a code path in
the GitHub auth backend logic in `backends.py` that is impossible in
production, and had just been left around for these broken tests.
This code path has actually been dead for a while (since
`invalid_subdomain` gets set to True only when `user_profile` is
`None`). We might want to re-introduce it later, but for now, we
eliminate it and the artificial test that provided it with test
coverage.
This is done mainly because this backend has the simplest code path
for calling login_or_register_remote_user, more than because we expect
this case to come up. It'll make it easier to write unit tests for
the `invalid_subdomain` corner case.
Tim Abbott
Vishnu Ks
Eeshan Garg
Steve Howell
Utkarsh Patil