This is preparatory commit for #18941.
Importing `do_delete_message` from `message_edit.py` was causing a
circular import error. In order to avoid that, we create a separate
message_delete.py file which has all the functions related to deleting
messages.
The tests for deleting messages are present in
`zerver/tests/test_message_edit.py`.
Fixes a part of #18941
This uses a more specific type `_StrPromise` to replace `Promise`
providing typing information for lazy translation strings.
In places where the callee evaluates the `_StrPromise` object in all
cases we simply force the evaluation with `str()`. This includes
`JsonableError` that ends up handled by the error handler middleware,
and `internal_send_stream_message` that depends on `check_stream_topic`,
requiring the `topic` to be evaluated anyway. In other siuations, the
callee is expected to be able to handle `StrPromise` explicitly.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
Whether we sent a resolve topic notification or not may be useful in
the caller. It was originally intended to be used in #21712, but may
only be relevant for future logging.
Part of #21712.
This will have no real effect in most situations. However, a user
moves a topic to another stream while also adding/removing the
resolved-topic checkmark from the topic name, then the "This topic was
resolved" notificaiton will now appear just before the "This topic was
moved" notification rather than just after.
This is likely slightly less confusing to users, since the topic
having been moved from somewhere else is likely the most salient fact
to a reader.
We expect to change things to not send both notifications in an
upcoming commit.
This refactoring helps with #21712.
This commit changes the code to consider zero as an invalid value for
message_content_edit_time_limit_seconds. Now to represent the setting that
user can edit the message anytime, the setting value will be "None" in
database and "unlimited" will be passed to API from clients.
We now send a new user_topic event while muting and unmuting topics.
fetch_initial_state_data now returns an additional user_topics array to
the client that will maintain the user-topic relationship data.
This will support any future addition of new features to modify the
relationship between a user-topic pair.
This commit adds the relevent backend code and schema for the new
event.
We separate the permission checks for content and topic edits
by changing the can_edit_topic_or_content to can_edit_topic
and use it only for checking topic edits and check content
edits separately in check_update_message itself. There is no
change in behavior as of this PR, there will be more changes
as per #21739.
This is a prep commit for #21739. The permission checks for
them are essentially separate except the one that message
sender is allowed to edit content and topic irresepctive of
edit_topic_policy setting, and this will too be changed in
future commit and so it will be better to have these checks
separate for readability.
We can also probably create a new function for checking content
edits but currently we only check the sender is same as the use
who is editing and it does not make sense to have a separate
function for just one check. We can do so in future in case we
do some more refactoring for #21739.
When there is no topic/stream being change, `propagate_mode` becomes
unnecessary. We add an assertion to ensure that the previous assumption
that `propagate_mode` is not `None` still holds when either `topic_name`
or `new_stream` is not `None`.
We can possibly improve this by overloading `do_update_message` and
`check_update_message`, but that's beyond the scope of the PR and
feasibility of doing that should also be further discussed.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
When editing an old message in a private stream with protected
history, the server would incorrectly send an API event including the
edited message to all of the stream’s current subscribers, including
those who should not have access to the old message. This API event is
ignored by official clients, so it could only be observed by a user
using a modified client or their browser’s developer tools.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
cfcbf58cd1 rightly removed the use of `user_ids` in
`render_markdown`, which in turn makes it unnecessary in
`render_incoming_message`.
Remove the unnecessary parameter from `render_incoming_message`.
madrix01
Zixuan James Li
Julia Bichler
Sahil Batra
Tim Abbott
Kartik Srivastava
Anders Kaseorg
Alex Vandiver