This replaces the temporary (and testless) fix in
24b1439e93 with a more permanent
fix.
Instead of checking if the user is a bot just before
sending the notifications, we now just don't enqueue
notifications for bots. This is done by sending a list
of bot IDs to the event_queue code, just like other
lists which are used for creating NotificationData objects.
Credit @andersk for the test code in `test_notification_data.py`.
We now complain if a test author sends a stream message
that does not result in the sender getting a
UserMessage row for the message.
This is basically 100% equivalent to complaining that
the author failed to subscribe the sender to the stream
as part of the test setup, as far as I can tell, so the
AssertionError instructs the author to subscribe the
sender to the stream.
We exempt bots from this check, although it is
plausible we should only exempt the system bots like
the notification bot.
I considered auto-subscribing the sender to the stream,
but that can be a little more expensive than the
current check, and we generally want test setup to be
explicit.
If there is some legitimate way than a subscribed human
sender can't get a UserMessage, then we probably want
an explicit test for that, or we may want to change the
backend to just write a UserMessage row in that
hypothetical situation.
For most tests, including almost all the ones fixed
here, the author just wants their test setup to
realistically reflect normal operation, and often devs
may not realize that Cordelia is not subscribed to
Denmark or not realize that Hamlet is not subscribed to
Scotland.
Some of us don't remember our Shakespeare from high
school, and our stream subscriptions don't even
necessarily reflect which countries the Bard placed his
characters in.
There may also be some legitimate use case where an
author wants to simulate sending a message to an
unsubscribed stream, but for those edge cases, they can
always set allow_unsubscribed_sender to True.
This fixes a bug where email notifications were sent for wildcard
mentions even if the `enable_offline_email_notifications` setting was
turned off.
This was because the `notification_data` class incorrectly considered
`wildcard_mentions_notify` as an indeoendent setting, instead of a wrapper
around `enable_offline_email_notifications` and `enable_offline_push_notifications`.
Also add a test for this case.
Previously, we checked for the `enable_offline_email_notifications` and
`enable_offline_push_notifications` settings (which determine whether the
user will receive notifications for PMs and mentions) just before sending
notifications. This has a few problem:
1. We do not have access to all the user settings in the notification
handlers (`handle_missedmessage_emails` and `handle_push_notifications`),
and therefore, we cannot correctly determine whether the notification should
be sent. Checks like the following which existed previously, will, for
example, incorrectly not send notifications even when stream email
notifications are enabled-
```
if not receives_offline_email_notifications(user_profile):
return
```
With this commit, we simply do not enqueue notifications if the "offline"
settings are disabled, which fixes that bug.
Additionally, this also fixes a bug with the "online push notifications"
feature, which was, if someone were to:
* turn off notifications for PMs and mentions (`enable_offline_push_notifications`)
* turn on stream push notifications (`enable_stream_push_notifications`)
* turn on "online push" (`enable_online_push_notifications`)
then, they would still receive notifications for PMs when online.
This isn't how the "online push enabled" feature is supposed to work;
it should only act as a wrapper around the other notification settings.
The buggy code was this in `handle_push_notifications`:
```
if not (
receives_offline_push_notifications(user_profile)
or receives_online_push_notifications(user_profile)
):
return
// send notifications
```
This commit removes that code, and extends our `notification_data.py` logic
to cover this case, along with tests.
2. The name for these settings is slightly misleading. They essentially
talk about "what to send notifications for" (PMs and mentions), and not
"when to send notifications" (offline). This commit improves this condition
by restricting the use of this term only to the database field, and using
clearer names everywhere else. This distinction will be important to have
non-confusing code when we implement multiple options for notifications
in the future as dropdown (never/when offline/when offline or online, etc).
3. We should ideally re-check all notification settings just before the
notifications are sent. This is especially important for email notifications,
which may be sent after a long time after the message was sent. We will
in the future add code to thoroughly re-check settings before sending
notifications in a clean manner, but temporarily not re-checking isn't
a terrible scenario either.
* `stream_name`: This field is actually redundant. The email/push
notifications handlers don't use that field from the dict, and they
anyways query for the message, so we're safe in deleting this field,
even if in the future we end up needing the stream name.
* `timestamp`: This is totally unused by the email/push notification
handlers, and aren't sent to push clients either.
* `type` is used only for the push notifications handler, since only
push notifications can be revoked, so we move them to only run there.
We will later use this data to include text like:
`<sender> mentioned @<user_group>` instead of the current
`<sender> mentioned you` when someone mentions a user group
the current user is a part of in email/push notification.
Part of #13080.
* Modify `maybe_enqueue_notifications` to take in an instance of the
dataclass introduced in 951b49c048.
* The `check_notify` tests tested the "when to notify" logic in a way
which involved `maybe_enqueue_notifications`. To simplify things, we've
earlier extracted this logic in 8182632d7e.
So, we just kill off the `check_notify` test, and keep only those parts
which verify the queueing and return value behavior of that funtion.
* We retain the the missedmessage_hook and message
message_edit_notifications since they are more integration-style.
* There's a slightly subtle change with the missedmessage_hook tests.
Before this commit, we short-circuited the hook if the sender was muted
(5a642cea11).
With this commit, we delegate the check to our dataclass methods.
So, `maybe_enqueue_notifications` will be called even if the sender was
muted, and the test needs to be updated.
* In our test helper `get_maybe_enqueue_notifications_parameters` which
generates default values for testing `maybe_enqueue_notifications` calls,
we keep `message_id`, `sender_id`, and `user_id` as required arguments,
so that the tests are super-clear and avoid accidental false positives.
* Because `do_update_embedded_data` also sends `update_message` events,
we deal with that case with some hacky code for now. See the comment
there.
This mostly completes the extraction of the "when to notify" logic into
our new `notification_data` module.
* Have the `get_active_presence_idle_user_ids` function look at all the
user data, not just `private_message` and `mentioned`.
* Fix a couple of incorrect `missedmessage_hook` tests, which did not
catch the earlier behaviour.
* Add some comments to the tests for this function for clarity.
* Add a helper to create `UserMessageNotificationsData` objects from the
user ID lists. This will later help us deduplicate code in the event_queue
logic.
This fixes a bug which earlier existed, that if a user turned on stream
notifications, and received a message in that stream which did not mention
them, they wouldn't be in the `presence_idle_users` list, and hence would
never get notifications for that message.
Note that, after this commit, users might still not get notifications in
the above scenarios in some cases, because the downstream logic in the
notification queue consumers sometimes erroneously skips sending
notifications for stream messages.
This is separate from the next commit for ease of testing.
To verify that the compatibility code works correctly, all message send
and event_queue tests from our test suite should pass on just this commit.
* In `event_queue.py`, only the sender and recipient users who have muted
the sender will have the "read" flag set.
* We already skip enqueueing notifications for users who've muted the sender
after 58da384da3.
* The queue consume functions for email and push notifications already
check filter messages which have been read before sending notifications.
* So, the "read" logic in `event_queue.py` is unnecessary, and the
processing power saved from not enqueueing notifications for a single
user should be insignificant, so we remove these checks all toghether.
The `message_id` and `user_profile_id` values don't really matter for
our testing here, so we might as well set these dummy values in the
main function.
This is a bit hacky, but will make these tests more readable,
in that the reader would not have to remember the order or parameter
names.
Python 3.8 introduced `mock.call_args.kwargs`, and once we upgrade,
we can use those to assert actual dictionaries instead of this hack.
Minimized code duplication by integrating POSTRequestMock into
HostRequestMock and then updating the required files with
HostRequestMock.
Fixes part of #1211.
A few internal fields used for tracking which types of notifications
have already been sent for a given message, like `hander_id` and the
`push_notified` bundle of fields were being incorrectly included in
message events delivered to clients clients.
One could argue these fields might be useful hints to clients, but
because notifications can be triggered later on via
`missedmessage_hook`, they have no useful purpose in the API.
This commit move these extended event field on a `internal_data`
object within the event object, and delete this field in `contents()`
for call points that would serve data to clients.
Tweaked by tabbott to provide a cleaner interface.
We're not bumping API_FEATURE_LEVEL because these fields have always
been documented as being present only due to a bug, so no clients
should be expecting or relying on them.
Fixes: #15947.
In development and test, we keep the Tornado port at 9993 and 9983,
respectively; this allows tests to run while a dev instance is
running.
In production, moving to port 9800 consistently removes an odd edge
case, when just one worker is on an entirely different port than if
two workers are used.
The restart event was always handled pretty similarly
to pointer, so I use restart events now for this
test (in preparation of eliminating pointer events).
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>
mock is just a backport of the standard library’s unittest.mock now.
The SAMLAuthBackendTest change is needed because
MagicMock.call_args.args wasn’t introduced until Python
3.8 (https://bugs.python.org/issue21269).
The PROVISION_VERSION bump is skipped because mock is still an
indirect dev requirement via moto.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Generated by autopep8, with the setup.cfg configuration from #14532.
I’m not sure why pycodestyle didn’t already flag these.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
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 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.)
For new user onboarding, it's important for it to be easy to verify
that Zulip's mobile push notifications work without jumping through
hoops or potentially making mistakes. For that reason, it makes sense
to toggle the notification defaults for new users to the more
aggressive mode (ignoring whether the user is currently actively
online); they can set the more subtle mode if they find that the
notifications are annoying.
Adds required API and front-end changes to modify and read the
wildcard_mentions_notify field in the Subscription model.
It includes front-end code to add the setting to the user's "manage
streams" page. This setting will be greyed out when a stream is muted.
The PR also includes back-end code to add the setting the initial state of
a subscription.
New automated tests were added for the API, events system and front-end.
In manual testing, we checked that modifying the setting in the front end
persisted the change in the Subscription model. We noticed the notifications
were not behaving exactly as expected in manual testing; see
https://github.com/zulip/zulip/issues/13073#issuecomment-560263081 .
Tweaked by tabbott to fix real-time synchronization issues.
Fixes: #13429.
This change makes it possible for users to control the notification
settings for wildcard mentions as a separate control from PMs and
direct @-mentions.
Historically, Zulip's implementation of wildcard mentions never
triggered either email or push notifications, instead being limited to
desktop notifications and the "mentions" counter.
We fix this just by plumbing the "wildcard_mentioned" flag through our
system.
Implements much of
https://github.com/zulip/zulip/issues/6040#issuecomment-510157264.
We're also now ready to seriously work on #3750.
Rather than continually resetting the contents of an existing event
queue, we allocate a new one for each subtest.
We also fix a rather confusing bundle of comments.
Anders Kaseorg
Zixuan James Li
Abhijeet Prasad Bodas
Steve Howell
shanukun
Rex Ferrer
Alex Vandiver
Anders Kaseorg
Steve Howell
Tim Abbott
Nat1405