We still need to write to these globals with set_global because the
code being tested reads from them, but the tests themselves should
never need to read from them.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Replaced methods/functions of moment.js with date-fns library.
The motive was to replace it with a smaller frontend timezone library.
Date-fns ~ 11.51 kb
moment.js ~ 217.87 kb
Some of the format strings change because date-fns encodes them
differently from how moment did.
Fixes#16373.
While working on shifting toward native browser time zone APIs
(#16451), it was found that all but very recent Chrome and Node
versions reject certain legacy timezone aliases like US/Pacific
(https://crbug.com/364374).
For now, we only canonicalize the timezone property returned in user
objects and not the timezone setting itself.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
ES and TypeScript modules are strict by default and don’t need this
directive. ESLint will remind us to add it to new CommonJS files and
remove it from ES and TypeScript modules.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Note that require("moment") and require("moment-timezone") resolve to
the same thing, but the latter adds timezone support as a side effect.
So I went with the latter in every file where .tz is used.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Prettier would do this anyway, but it’s separated out for a more
reviewable diff. Generated by ESLint.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
In 5200598a31, we introduced a new
client capability that can be used to avoid unreasonable network
bandwidth consumed sending avatar URLs of long term idle users in
organizations with 10,000s members.
This commit enables this feature and adds support for it to the web
client.
This commit adds the option of owner role in user role dropdown
and also takes care of the restrictions while adding/removing
owner status of the user.
This commit also handles the places where we dispaly role of
the user in UI.
This commit removes the 'get_active_user_for_email' function
from people.js. We have removed the use of this function
in the previous commits, which changed the functions using
'get_active_user_for_email' to use user_ids instead of emails.
The get_active_humans and get_non_active_humans functions used
to return a list of user objects. The get_active_humans is used
on settings_users.js and settings_bots.js, and in both places the
only attributes needed of the person object are the user_id and
full_name.
To make the function return smaller, instead of a list of active
humans, we are returning a list of active human ids, saving memory.
With the ids we can call the people API to get the full_name attribute.
The people.js tests were using _add_user function to add
cross realm bots. The problem is that _add_user function
doesn't properly simulates the adding process as it doesn't
add the user in cross_realm_dict as well.
To solve this and eliminate the need of calling
people.initialize(), which means the params obj needs to be
defined, we extracted the whole logic of adding a cross realm
user into a separete function, add_cross_realm_user.
If you have a group PM where some users have
three-digit user_ids and some with four-digit
user_ids (or similar), a huddle could effectively
be ignored when determining the order of
search search suggestions.
Basically, we need a way to canonically sort
user_ids in "huddle" strings, and it's somewhat
arbitrary whether you sort lexically or sort
numerically, but you do need to be consistent
about it.
And JS is not exactly helpful here:
> [99, 101].sort()
[ 101, 99 ]
This is a pretty obscure bug with pretty low
user-facing consequences, and it was never
reported to us as far as I know, but the fix
here is pretty straightforward.
We have had similar bugs of slightly more consequence
in the past. The reason this bug has shown
up multiple times in our codebase is that every
component that deals with huddles has slightly
different forces that determine how it wants
to serialize the huddle. It's just one of those
annoying things. Plus, bugs with group PMs
do tend to escape detection, since most people
spend most of their time either on streams
or in 1:1 PMs.
This is a pure code extraction. The current
code is buggy with respect to user_ids with
different lengths of digits, i.e. it does
a naive lexical sort instead of a numerical
sort. We'll fix that in the next commit.
I consolidate most of our users toward the top
of the file, so that we don't have to clutter
up individual tests. This also avoids some
confusion where charles/maria got repeated
in different tests with different ids.
I also introduce a couple four-digit ids to
try to expose more bugs related to sorting.
Note that it's still easy to keep tests
isolated here, as we have always been able
to cheaply re-initialize `people.js` and then
add individual users back.
There are still some tests where it makes
sense to just declare users locally, especially
if we are mutating their data.
There are a few minor incidental cleanups here,
mostly involving replacing hard coded ids
with things like `maria.user_id`.
'get_active_message_people` function is added which returns active
users who have sent the messages that are currently showing up in
the feed.
typeahead fetches the users from 'get_active_message_people` instead
of `get_message_people` and thus shows only active users in the
mention typeahead and excludes deactivated users.
Fixes#14310
This commit moves the get_visible_email function to people.js
as this function will be used in other places and people.js seems
relevant file for this.
Tests are added to get full coverage.
This is code simplification motivated
by a recent bug that we fixed with some
server changes, but which was really
caused in some sense by our client code
using an overly finicky
condition to check falsiness.
For cross-realm bots, the value of
`user.bot_owner_id` may be `null`, or it
may simply be `undefined`, depending
on whether the server passes `None`
or simply omits the field.
We don't want out client code to be
coupled to that rather arbitrary
decision.
We were doing a `!== null` check instead
of checking for falsiness, which led to
blueslip errors in the past. Because a
bot owner id could be plausibly 0, a falsiness
check would be brittle in a different way.
Now we avoid that ugliness by calling
`get_bot_owner_user`, which either returns
an object or `undefined`.
And then the caller can just do a concise
check for whether `bot_owner` exists.
And we also fix up the crufty code that
was putting `bot_owner_full_name` on to
the object instead of using a local.
We have a bug report for this again, although
it might be on an old branch.
Fixes#13621.
We had this API:
people.add_in_realm = full-fledged user
people.add = not necessarily in realm
Now the API is this:
people.add = full-fledged user
people._add_user = internal API for cross-realm bots
and deactivated users
I think in most of our tests the distinction between
people.add() and people.add_in_realm() was just an
accident of history and didn't reflect any real intention.
And if I had to guess the intention in 99% of the cases,
folks probably thought they were just creating ordinary,
active users in the current realm.
In places where the distinction was obviously important
(because a test failed), I deactivated the user via
`people.deactivate`.
For the 'basics' test in the people test suite, I clean
up the test setup for Isaac. Before this commit I was
adding him first as a non-realm user then as a full-fledged
user, but this was contrived and confusing, and we
didn't really need it for test coverage purposes.
Before this commit, presence used get_realm_count()
to determine whether a realm was "small" (and thus
should show all human users in the buddy list, even
humans that had not been active in a while).
The `get_realm_count` function--despite a very wrong,
misleading comment--was including bots in its count.
The new function truly counts only active humans
(and no bots).
Because we were overcounting users before this change,
we should technically adjust `BIG_REALM_COUNT` down
by some amount to reflect our original intention there
on the parameter. I'm leaving it alone for now, though,
since we've improved the performance of the buddy list
over time, and it's probably fine if a few "big" realms
get re-classified as small realms (and show more users)
by virtue of this change.
(Also note that this cutoff value only affects the
"normal" view of the buddy list; both small realms
and large realms will show long-inactive users if you
do searches.)
Fixes#14215
Anders Kaseorg
aryanshridhar
Priyank Patel
Steve Howell
Hashir Sarwar
sahil839
Aman Agrawal
Clara Dantas
Rohitt Vashishtha
Steve Howell
Stefan Weil