There is still some miscellaneous cleanup that
has to happen for things like analytics queries
and dead code in node tests, but this should
remove the main use of pointers in the backend.
(We will also still need to drop the DB field.)
This commit is first of few commita which aim to change all the
bugdown references to markdown. This commits rename the files,
file path mentions and change the imports.
Variables and other references to bugdown will be renamed in susequent
commits.
Due to authentication restrictions, a deployment may need to direct
traffic for mobile applications to an alternate uri to take advantage
alternate authentication mechansism. By default the standard realm URI
will be usedm but if overridden in the settings file, an alternate uri
can be substituted.
Now we are consistent about validating color/description.
Ideally we wouldn't need to validate the
`streams_raw` parameters multiple times per
request, but the outer function here changes
the error messages to explicitly reference
the "delete" and "add" request variables.
And for the situation where the user-supplied
parameters are correct, the performance penalty
for checking them twice is extremely negligible.
So it's probably fine for now to just make sure
we use the same validators in all the relevant
places.
There's probably some deeper refactor that we
can do to eliminate the whole `compose_views`
scheme. And it's also not entirely clear to
me that we really need to support the update
endpoint. But that's all out of the scope of
this commit.
Update the REQ check for profile_data in
update_user_backend by tweaking `check_profile_data`
to use `check_dict_only`.
Here is the relevant URL:
path('users/<int:user_id>', rest_dispatch,
{'GET': 'zerver.views.users.get_members_backend',
It would be nice to unify the validator
for these two views, but they are different:
update_user_backend
update_user_custom_profile_data
It's not completely clear to me why update_user_backend
seems to support a superset of the functionality
of `update_user_custom_profile_data`, but it has
this code to allow you to remove custom profile fields:
clean_profile_data = []
for entry in profile_data:
assert isinstance(entry["id"], int)
if entry["value"] is None or not entry["value"]:
field_id = entry["id"]
check_remove_custom_profile_field_value(target, field_id)
else:
clean_profile_data.append({
"id": entry["id"],
"value": entry["value"],
})
Whereas the other view is much simpler:
def update_user_custom_profile_data(
<snip>
) -> HttpResponse:
validate_user_custom_profile_data(user_profile.realm.id, data)
do_update_user_custom_profile_data_if_changed(user_profile, data)
# We need to call this explicitly otherwise constraints are not check
return json_success()
This tightens our checking of user-supplied data
for this endpoint:
path('users/me/profile_data', rest_dispatch,
{'PATCH': 'zerver.views.custom_profile_fields.update_user_custom_profile_data',
...
We now explicitly require the `value` field
to be present in the dicts being passed in
here, as part of `REQ`. There is no reason
that our current clients would be sending
extra fields here, and we would just ignore
them anyway, so we also move to using
check_dict_only.
Here is some relevant webapp code (see settings_account.js):
fields.push({id: field.id, value: user_ids});
update_user_custom_profile_fields(fields, channel.patch);
settings_ui.do_settings_change(method, "/json/users/me/profile_data",
{data: JSON.stringify([field])}, spinner_element);
The webapp code sends fields one at a time
as one-element arrays, which is strange, but
that is out of the scope of this change.
`/api/v1/fetch_api_key`'s response had a key `email` with the user's
delivery email. But its JSON counterpart `/json/fetch_api_key`, which
has a completely different implementation, did not return `email` in
its success response.
So to avoid confusion, the non-API endpoint, `/json/fetch_api_key`
response has been made identical with it's `/api` counterpart by
adding the `email` key. Also it is safe to send as the calling user
will only see their own email.
Currently, we use -1 as the Realm.message_retention_days value to retain
message forever unless specified at stream level for a particular stream,
that is, no policy set at the realm level. But this is incoherent with what
we use for Stream.message_retention_days where -1 means
> disable retention policy for this stream unconditionally
that can be confusing from an API standpoint.
So instead of trying some hack to reset the value to NULL or using some
other value like -2 for RETAIN_MESSAGE_FOREVER and use that for API. It is
much more intuitive to use a string like 'forever' that can be mapped to
RETAIN_MESSAGE_FOREVER at the backend. And this is similar to what we use
for streams settings as well.
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.
With this implementation of the feature of the automatic theme
detection, we make the following changes in the backend, frontend and
documentation.
This replaces the previous night_mode boolean with an enum, with the
default value being to use the prefers-color-scheme feature of the
operating system to determine which theme to use.
Fixes: #14451.
Co-authored-by: @kPerikou <44238834+kPerikou@users.noreply.github.com>
We can now invite new users as realm owners. We restrict only
owners to invite new users as owners both for single invite
and multiuse invite link. Also, only owners can revoke or resend
owner invitations.
Old: a validator returns None on success and returns an error string
on error.
New: a validator returns the validated value on success and raises
ValidationError on error.
This allows mypy to catch mismatches between the annotated type of a
REQ parameter and the type that the validator actually validates.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Rename the validator to check_union, to conform
more to Python typing nomenclature.
And we rename one of the test helpers to the
simpler `check_types`. (The test helper
was using "variable" in the "var" sense.)
The non-search code path here was simulating the response and escaping
logic from get_search_fields by duplicating what it would do with an
empty set of highlight locations.
We can produce much more readable code by just passing an empty list
of locations in this case.
This adds a new client_capability that clients such as the mobile apps
can use to avoid unreasonable network bandwidth consumed sending
avatar URLs in organizations with 10,000s of users.
Clients don't strictly need this data, as they can always use the
/avatar/{user_id} endpoint to fetch the avatar if desired.
This will be more efficient especially for realms with
10,000+ users because the avatar URLs would increase the
payload size significantly and cost us more bandwidth.
Fixes#15287.
This commit adds backend support for setting message_retention_days
while creating streams and updating it for an existing stream. We only
allow organization owners to set/update it for a stream.
'message_retention_days' field for a stream existed previously also, but
there was no way to set it while creating streams or update it for an
exisiting streams using any endpoint.
The most import change here is the one in maybe_send_to_registration
codepath, as the insufficient validation there could lead to fetching
an expired PreregistrationUser that was invited as an administrator
admin even years ago, leading to this registration ending up in the
new user being a realm administrator.
Combined with the buggy migration in
0198_preregistrationuser_invited_as.py, this led to users incorrectly
joining as organizations administrators by accident. But even without
that bug, this issue could have allowed a user who was invited as an
administrator but then had that invitation expire and then joined via
social authentication incorrectly join as an organization administrator.
The second change is in ConfirmationEmailWorker, where this wasn't a
security problem, but if the server was stopped for long enough, with
some invites to send out email for in the queue, then after starting it
up again, the queue worker would send out emails for invites that
had already expired.
Anders Kaseorg
Mohit Gupta
Mateusz Mandera
Steve Howell
Vishnu KS
Tim April
Tim Abbott
orientor
Pragati Agrawal
Hashir Sarwar
Felix
MariaGkoulta
sahil839