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.
We want to move more logic to stream_data to facilitate
testing.
Both before and after this commit, we essentially build a
new list of users for typeahead, but now the new list
excludes subscribed users. We can do even better than
this in a follow-up commit.
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
We now restrict emails on the zulip realm, and now
`email` and `delivery_email` will be different for
users.
This change should make it more likely to catch
errors where we leak delivery emails or use the
wrong field for lookups.
Given that can_mark_messages_read is called whenever the blue box
cursor stops on a message and that it is calculated purely on the
basis of sorted_term_types, it makes sense to cache the result.
If you were in the "Starred messages" narrow and
your pointer was on a message with the stream/topic
of "social/lunch", we wouldn't move you to the unread
messages for that topic.
I fixed this by removing the code that looked at
the current message's topic. Instead, we only look
at the active narrow to figure out the "next" topic
to go to.
Fixes#14120.
Original email address is shown to admin users in subscriber list when
email_address_visibilty is set to "Admins only" by passing delivery_email
at required places. Email address are not shown to non-admin users when
visibility is set to "Admins only".
Tweaked by tabbott to fix a few bugs and dead code.
Fixes a part of #13541.
This intent is that we'll be able to reuse this when editing streams
as well.
* Rename method: filter_with_new_topic to filter_with_new_param.
* Fix tests and method calls.
This extends our email address visibility settings to deny access to
user email addresses even to organization administrators.
At the moment, they can of course change the setting (which leaves an
audit trail), but in the future only organization owners will be able
to change that setting.
While we're at this, we rewrite the settings_data.js test to cover all
the cases in a more consistent way.
Fixes#14111.
The file populates `windows.i18n`, so now
the file name matches our convention.
Note that the module really just initializes
`i18next` and then does this:
window.i18n = i18next;
It doesn't really add any functionality to
third party library.
Before this test, we were validating the behavior
of `i18next`, but we weren't validating our light
layer that sits on top of `i18next`, which currently
resides in the slightly misnamed `translations.js`
file.
The translations module is now so small that I'll
just quote it verbatim here:
import i18next from 'i18next';
i18next.init({
lng: 'lang',
resources: {
lang: {
translation: page_params.translation_data,
},
},
nsSeparator: false,
keySeparator: false,
interpolation: {
prefix: "__",
suffix: "__",
},
returnEmptyString: false, // Empty string is not a valid translation.
});
window.i18n = i18next;
We now just do `zrequire('translations')` to initialize
the `i18next` library, which allows us to have simpler
test setup and to actually exercise the above call to
`i18next.init`.
This change now gives us 100% line coverage of `translations.js`,
which of course isn't that hard to acheive (see above).
This extracts a new module with three
functions, which we will test with 100%
line coverage:
- show_email
- email_for_user_settings
- get_time_preferences
The first two break several dependencies
in the codebase on `settings_org.js`. The
`get_time_preferences` breaks an annoying
dependency on `page_params` within people.
The module is pretty cohesive, in terms that
all three functions are just light wrappers
around `page_params` and/or `settings_config`.
Now all the modules that want to call show_email()
only have to require `settings_data`, instead of
having a dependency on the much heavier
`settings_org.js` module.
I also make some of the unit tests here be more
full-stack, where instead of stubbing show_email,
I basically just toggle `page_params.is_admin`.
Explicitly stubbing i18n in 48 different files
is mostly busy work at this point, and it doesn't
provide much signal, since often it's invoked
only to satisfy transitive dependencies.
This follows the convention of other code calling into
add_sub_to_table of checking whether the stream settings overlay is
open (and thus in the DOM) before trying to rerender it.
We add these two functions to the API,
so that we no longer have `alert_words_ui`
using private data from `alert_word`:
alert_words.has_alert_word()
alert_words.get_word_list()
And to initialize the data, we have a proper
`initialize` method that is passed in only
the parameters that it needs from `ui_init`.
(We also move the step of deleting `alert_words`
from `page_params` to the `ui_init` module.)
Because it's a bit less cumbersome to initialize
`alert_words`, we now just it directly in the
node tests for `alert_words_ui`.
This is follow up to da79fd206a
I accidentally skipped over pm_conversations. Same
ideas as the bigger previous commit--we pass in params
to the initialize function and do the delete cleanup
within ui_init.
Let's say you have module hello.js like so:
// hello.js
const hello_world = i18n.t('Hello world');
exports.get_greeting = () => hello_world;
And then two modules like this:
// apple.js
const hello = require('hello');
exports.foo = () => {
show_greeting(hello.get_greeting());
};
// banana.js
const hello = require('hello');
exports.foo = () => {
display_greeting(hello.get_greeting());
};
The test for apple.js could look like this,
and it won't crash due to the stub:
set_global('i18n', {t: () => {}});
zrequire('hello');
zrequire('apple');
Now let's say your write this broken version
of a test for banana.js:
zrequire('hello');
zrequire('banana');
If you run `./tools/test-js-with-node`, the
"banana" test will pass, because while it
does require "hello", it won't actually
*execute* the code that happens at require
time for "hello", because it's already in
the cache. Here is the code that gets
skipped:
const hello_world = i18n.t('Hello world');
But then if you try to run the banana test
individually, the above line of code will
cause the test to crash. And it will crash
even before you actually try to test the
meaningful code here:
exports.foo = () => {
display_greeting(hello.get_greeting());
};
This commit fixes this leak scenario by just
aggressively clearing out things from the
require cache.
This slows tests down by about 10%, which I think
is worth the extra safety here.
This cleans up the handoff of page_params
data between ui_init and modules that
take over ownership of page_params-derived
data.
Read the long comment in ui_init for a bit
more context.
Most of this diff is actually test cleanup.
And a lot of the diff to "real" code is
just glorified `s/page_params/params/`
in the `initialize` functions.
One little oddity is that we don't actually
surrender ownership of `page_params.user_id`
to `people.js`. We could plausibly sweep
the rest of the codebase to just use
`people.my_user_id()` consistently, but it's
not a super high priority thing to fix,
since the value never changes.
The stream_data situation is a bit messy,
since we consume `page_params` data in the
initialize() function in addition to the
`params` data we "own". I added a comment
there and intend to follow up. I tried
to mostly avoid the "word soup" by extracting
three locals at the top.
Finally, I don't touch `alert_words` yet,
despite it also doing the delete-page-params-data
dance. The problem is that `alert_words`
doesn't have a proper `initialize()`. We
should clean that up and have it use a
`Map` internally, too.
This gives them cache-compatible URLs, and also avoids some extra
copies of the sprite sheet images.
Comments on the Octopus emoji added by tabbott.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This is not always a behavior-preserving translation: _.defaults
mutates its first argument. However, the code does not always appear
to have been written to expect that.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This is not always a behavior-preserving translation: _.extend mutates
its first argument. However, the code does not always appear to have
been written to expect that.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This is not always a behavior-preserving translation: $.extend mutates
its first argument. However, the code does not always appear to have
been written to expect that.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This test wasn't particularly high value, was flaky, and would be
better rewritten as a set of node tests verifying the logic that would
run 100x as fast and more reliably for similar testing fidelity.
Steve Howell
YashRE42
sahil839
Wbert Adrian Castro Vera
Tim Abbott
Anders Kaseorg
Rohitt Vashishtha
Vaibhav Raj Singh