This commit adds users to the appropriate system user group
based on their role. We also change the user groups when
changing role of the user.
We also add migration to add existing users to the appropriate
user groups.
This commit adds update_users_in_full_members_system_group which
is currently used to update the full members group on changing
role of a user. This function will be modified in next commit such
that it can be used to update full members group on changing
waiting_period_threshold setting of realm.
This also fixes a warning from
RealmExportTest.test_endpoint_local_uploads: “ResourceWarning:
unclosed file <_io.BufferedReader
name='/srv/zulip/var/…/test-export.tar.gz'>”.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
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.
It is confusing to have the plan type constants not be namespaced
by the thing they represent. We already have a namespacing
convention in place for constants, so we should use it for
Realm.plan_type as well.
For users who are not logged in and for those who don't have
'prefers_web_public_view' set in session, we redirect them
to the default login page where they can choose to login
as spectator or authenticated user.
This commit adds can_create_web_public_streams helper
in models.py which will be used to validate whether
user is allowed to create a web-public stream or not.
This commit also adds the checks for Realm.POLICY_OWNERS_ONLY
in check_has_permission_policies.
This commit adds tests for POLICY_EVERYONE and POLICY_NOBODY
in check_has_permission_policies test. The original code
used these values but these were not covered in test.
This fixes a problem where we could not import zerver.lib.streams from
zerver.lib.message, which would otherwise be reasonable, because the
former implicitly imported many modules due to this issue.
Our convention is to always have authenticate() called with a request
object. We need to be consistent with that in tests too, to avoid test
failures resulting from breaking that assumption.
We modify assert_login_failure to call client.login() in the same way as
the other similar helpers - with a properly initialized HttpRequest
instance.
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.
This fixes a batch of mypy errors of the following format:
'Item "None" of "Optional[Something]" has no attribute "abc"
Since we have already been recklessly using these attritbutes
in the tests, adding assertions beforehand is justified presuming
that they oughtn't to be None.
* `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.
This change allow check_webhook to raise an error when a message is
sent and vice versa. This is useful when one payload is not expecting
any output messages.
In addition to event filtering, we add support for registering supported
events for a webhook integration using the webhook_view decorator.
The event types are stored in the view function directly as a function
attribute, and can be later accessed via the module path and the view
function name are given (which is already specified the integrations.py)
Note that the WebhookTestCase doesn't know the name of the view function
and the module of the webhook. WEBHOOK_DIR_NAME needs to be overridden
if we want exceptions to raised when one of our test functions triggered
a unspecified event, but this practice is not enforced.
all_event_type does not need to be given even if event filters are used
in the webhook. But if a list of event types is given, it will be possible
for us to include it in the documentation while ensuring that all the
tested events are included (but not vice versa at the current stage, as
we yet not required all the events included in the list to be tested)
This guarantees that we can always access the list of all the tested
events of a webhook. This feature will be later plumbed to marcos to
display all event types dynamically in doc.md.
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.
Since FIXTURE_DIR_NAME is the name of the folder that contains the view
and tests modules of the webhook and another folder called "fixtures" that
store the fixtures, it is more appropriate to call it WEBHOOK_DIR_NAME,
especially when we want to refer to the view module using this variable.
* 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.
We will later consistently use these functions to check for notifiable
messages in the message send and event_queue code.
We have these functions accept the `sender_id` so that we can avoid the
`private_message = message["type"] == "private" and user_id != sender_id`
wizardy.
Further commits will hook `send_event` calls to `on_commit`
in some cases. This change will make it easier to test such
situations.
We don't need to actually capture the callbacks, because the
events sent are already tested via the list in which they are
captured by `tornado_redirected_to_list`.
Checked the email looked OK in `/emails` for both creating realm and
registering within an existing one.
Not sure zerver/tests/test_i18n.py test has been suppressed correctly.
Fixes#17786.
This is will make it easier to systematically use Django's
`capturOnCommitCallbacks` in tests outside of the main
`test_events` file which involve assertions on events.
Now that we are passing source realm's id instead of string_id in
source realm selector, it makes sense to rename the "source_realm" field
to "source_realm_id".
This allows access to be more configurable than just setting one
attribute. This can be configured by setting the setting
AUTH_LDAP_ADVANCED_REALM_ACCESS_CONTROL.
We refactor check_has_permission_policies to check for all user roles for
each value of policy. This will help in handle a case where a guest is
allowed to do something but moderator isn't.
We need to do user_profile.refresh_from_db() in validation_func because
the realm object from user_profile is used in has_permission and we need
updated realm instance after changing the policy.
This is a follow-up commit to 9a4c58cb.
The tests for can_create_streams and can_subscribe_other_users shares a
lot of code and we deduplicate the code by extracting most of the code
as check_has_permission_policies which will now be called by the two
tests test_can_create_streams and test_can_subscribe_other_users.
This will also help in avoiding the duplication of code when we will
convert more policies to use COMMON_POLICY_TYPES.
Note that at this point, it's not possible to create moderator users;
this just will make it easier to write tests for logic involving them
as we develop the feature.
We used to send occupy/vacate events when
either the first person entered a stream
or the last person exited.
It appears that our two main apps have never
looked at these events. Instead, it's
generally the case that clients handle
events related to stream creation/deactivation
and subscribe/unsubscribe.
Note that we removed the apply_events code
related to these events. This doesn't affect
the webapp, because the webapp doesn't care
about the "streams" field in do_events_register.
There is a theoretical situation where a
third party client could be the victim of
a race where the "streams" data includes
a stream where the last subscriber has left.
I suspect in most of those situations it
will be harmless, or possibly even helpful
to the extent that they'll learn about
streams that are in a "quasi" state where
they're activated but not occupied.
We could try to patch apply_event to
detect when subscriptions get added
or removed. Or we could just make the
"streams" piece of do_events_register
not care about occupy/vacate semantics.
I favor the latter, since it might
actually be what users what, and it will
also simplify the code and improve
performance.
Using web_public_guest for anonymous users is confusing since
'guest' is actually a logged-in user compared to
web_public_guest which is not logged-in and has only
read access to messages. So, we rename it to
web_public_visitor.
I think it's important that the callers understand
that bulk_add_subscriptions assumes all streams
are being created within a single realm, so I make
it an explicit parameter.
This may be overkill--I would also be happy if we
just included the assertions from this commit.
A later commit alters `authenticate` of EmailAuthBackend to
add a store `needs_to_change_password` variable to session
which is useful to insist users on changing their weak password.
The tests start failing with that change because client.login()
runs `authenticate` without a `request` object. So, this commit
sends a request object with `request.session=self.client.session`
to self.client.login() in tests wherever needed.
This lets the backend tests pass if zilencer has been (manually)
removed from EXTRA_INSTALLED_APPS, by skipping the tests that require
it. test-backend complains that some URLs are untested in this case:
ERROR: Some URLs are untested! Here's the list of untested URLs:
api/v1/users/me/android_gcm_reg_id
api/v1/users/me/apns_device_token
team/
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
This commit adds automatic detection of extra output (other than
printed by testing library or tools) in stderr and stdout by code under
test test-backend when it is run with flag --ban-console-output.
It also prints the test that produced the extra console output.
Fixes: #1587.
Commit c4254497b2
curiously had get_body() round tripping its data
through json load and dump.
I have seen this done for pretty-printing reasons,
but it doesn't apply here.
And if you're doing it for validation reasons,
you only need to do half the work, as my commit
here demonstrates.
We arguably don't even need the fail-fast code
here, since our fixtures are linted to be proper
json, I believe, plus downstream code probably
gives reasonably easy-to-diagnose symptoms.
We introduce get_payload for the relatively
exceptional cases where webhooks return payloads
as dicts.
Having a simple "str" type for get_body will
allow us to extract test helpers that use
payloads from get_body() without the ugly
`Union[str, Dict[str, str]]` annotations.
I also tightened up annotations in a few places
where we now call get_payload (using Dict[str, str]
instead of Dict[str, Any]).
In the zendesk test I explicitly stringify
one of the parameters to satisfy mypy.
We tighten up the mypy types here. And then
once we know that expected_message and expected_topic
are never None, we don't have call the do_test_message
and do_test_topic helpers any more, so we eliminate
them, too.
Finally, we don't return a message, since no tests
use the message currently.
This forces us to be a bit more explicit about testing
the three key values in any stream message, and it
also de-clutters the code a bit. I eventually want
to phase out do_test_topic and friends, since they
have the pitfall that you can call them and have them
do nothing, because they don't actually require
values to be be passed in.
I also clean up the code a bit for the tests that
have two new messages arriving.
Having an optional stream_name parameter makes
it confusing to read the code if you know your
webhook is sending private messages.
And then the other two callers are already
checking topics, so they might as well check
stream names, too.
We also have the two stream-oriented callers
make their own call to "subscribe". And we
future-proof this by making sure the exception
for no-message-being-sent calls out that gotcha.
Somewhat in passing, we now assert that
self.STREAM_NAME is not None in the main
helper. This is partly to satisfy mypy, but
it's also a good sanity check.
This also sets the stage for the next commit,
where I'll add an assert_stream_message helper.
Not all webhook payloads are json, so send_json_payload was a
bit misleading.
In passing I also remove "bytes" from the Union type for
"payload" parameter.
Almost all webhook tests use this helper, except a few
webhooks that write to private streams.
Being concise is important here, and the name
`self.send_and_test_stream_message` always confused
me, since it sounds you're sending a stream message,
and it leaves out the webhook piece.
We should consider renaming `send_and_test_private_message`
to something like `check_webhook_private`, but I couldn't
decide on a great name, and it's very rarely used. So
for now I just made sure the docstrings of the two
sibling functions reference each other.
This function is a bad idea, as it leads to a possible situation
where you aren't actually testing anything:
def do_test_message(self, msg: Message, expected_message: Optional[str]) -> None:
if expected_message is not None:
self.assertEqual(msg.content, expected_message)
Unfortunately, it's called deep in the stack in some places, but
we can safely replace it with assertEqual here.
The test helper here was taking an "expected_topic"
parameter that it just ignored, and then the
dialogflow tests were passing in expected messages
in that slot, so the actual "expected_message" var
was "None" and was ignored. So the tests weren't
testing anything.
Now we eliminate the crufty expected_topic parameter
and require an actual value for "expected_message".
I also clean up the mypy type for content_type,
and I remove the `content_type is None` check,
since all callers either pass in a str content
type or default to "application/json".
These weren’t wrong since orjson.JSONDecodeError subclasses
json.JSONDecodeError which subclasses ValueError, but the more
specific ones express the intention more clearly.
(ujson raised ValueError directly, as did json in Python 2.)
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Zixuan James Li
Anders Kaseorg
Sahil Batra
Eeshan Garg
Steve Howell
Mateusz Mandera
Aman Agrawal
Tim Abbott
Abhijeet Prasad Bodas
Dinesh
Vishnu KS
Gilbert Bishop-White
Siddharth Asthana
strifel
sahil839
shanukun
Alex Vandiver
Mohit Gupta
Clara Dantas