This is the first step to making the full switch to self-hosted servers
use user uuids, per issue #18017. The old id format is still supported
of course, for backward compatibility.
This commit is separate in order to allow deploying *just* the bouncer
API change to production first.
get_remote_server_by_uuid (called in validate_api_key) raises
ValidationError when given an invalid UUID due to how Django handles
UUIDField. We don't want that exception and prefer the ordinary
DoesNotExist exception to be raised.
Given that these values are uuids, it's better to use UUIDField which is
meant for exactly that, rather than an arbitrary CharField.
This requires modifying some tests to use valid uuids.
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>
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 adds a new API for sending basic analytics data (number of users,
number of messages sent) from a Zulip server to the Zulip Cloud
central analytics database, which will make it possible for servers to
elect to have their usage numbers counted in published stats on the
size of the Zulip ecosystem.
Previously, Zulip did not correctly handle the case of a mobile device
being registered with a push device token being registered for
multiple accounts on the same server (which is a common case on
zulipchat.com). This was because our database `unique` and
`unique_together` indexes incorrectly enforced the token being unique
on a given server, rather than unique for a given user_id.
We fix this gap, and at the same time remove unnecessary (and
incorrectly racey) logic deleting and recreating the tokens in the
appropriate tables.
There's still an open mobile app bug causing repeated re-registrations
in a loop, but this should fix the fact that the relevant mobile bug
causes the server to 500.
Follow-up work that may be of value includes:
* Removing `ios_app_id`, which may not have much purpose.
* Renaming `last_updated` to `data_created`, since that's what it is now.
But none of those are critical to solving the actual bug here.
Fixes#8841.
There are several situations in which we want to create a Customer and
stripe.Customer object before we really have a billing relationship with a
customer. The main one is giving non-profit or educational discounts.
Enforcing the unique constraint adds an unnecessary support burden for
figuring out who actually controls a given hostname, and in particular, for
verifying updates to the org id/key on a re-install of the Zulip server.
Since a user could use the same installation of the Zulip mobile app
with multiple Zulip servers, correct behavior is to allow reusing the
same token with multiple Zulip servers in the RemotePushDeviceToken
model.
This is an incomplete cleaned-up continuation of Lisa Neigut's push
notification bouncer work. It supports registration and
deregistration of individual push tokens with a central push
notification bouncer server.
It still is missing a few things before we can complete this effort:
* A registration form for server admins to configure their server for
this service, with tests.
* Code (and tests) for actually bouncing the notifications.
We fall back to guessing based on the realm if the user doesn't have a
profile in our system
(imported from commit 833885168c451074c885b4422d62986855a215f7)
This will allow us to redirect clients to the correct local site.
To apply this migration, just run:
python manage.py migrate zilencer 0002
(imported from commit 7bd39b5f035145b6b52e1b2cb2ad5f6720d598ce)
Here we introduce a new Django app, zilencer. The intent is to not have
this app enabled on LOCALSERVER instances, and for it to grow to include
all the functionality we want to have in our central server that isn't
relevant for local deployments.
Currently we have to modify functions in zerver/* to match; in the
future, it would be cool to have the relevant shared code broken out
into a separate library.
This commit inclues both the migration to create the models as well as a
data migration that (for non-LOCALSERVER) creates a single default
Deployment for zulip.com.
To apply this migration to your system, run:
./manage.py migrate zilencer
(imported from commit 86d5497ac120e03fa7f298a9cc08b192d5939b43)
Mateusz Mandera
Anders Kaseorg
Eeshan Garg
Anders Kaseorg
Mateusz Mandera
Rishi Gupta
Tim Abbott
Vishnu Ks
Aditya Bansal
Umair Khan
rht
Christian Hudon
Raghav Jajodia
anirudhjain75
Tim Abbott
Kevin Mehall
Luke Faraone