### Why?
Before, all flags were static. Therefore, they were stored in class variables and serialized by SiteSerializer. Recently, we added an option for admins to add their own flags or disable existing flags. Therefore, the class variable had to be dropped because it was unsafe for a multisite environment. However, it started causing performance problems.
### Solution
When a new Flag system is used, instead of using PostActionType, we can serialize Flags and use fragment cache for performance reasons.
At the same time, we are still supporting deprecated `replace_flags` API call. When it is used, we fall back to the old solution and the admin cannot add custom flags. In a couple of months, we will be able to drop that API function and clean that code properly. However, because it may still be used, redis cache was introduced to improve performance.
To test backward compatibility you can add this code to any plugin
```ruby
replace_flags do |flag_settings|
flag_settings.add(
4,
:inappropriate,
topic_type: true,
notify_type: true,
auto_action_type: true,
)
flag_settings.add(1001, :trolling, topic_type: true, notify_type: true, auto_action_type: true)
end
```
### Why?
Before, all flags were static. Therefore, they were stored in class variables and serialized by SiteSerializer. Recently, we added an option for admins to add their own flags or disable existing flags. Therefore, the class variable had to be dropped because it was unsafe for a multisite environment. However, it started causing performance problems.
### Solution
When a new Flag system is used, instead of using PostActionType, we can serialize Flags and use fragment cache for performance reasons.
At the same time, we are still supporting deprecated `replace_flags` API call. When it is used, we fall back to the old solution and the admin cannot add custom flags. In a couple of months, we will be able to drop that API function and clean that code properly. However, because it may still be used, redis cache was introduced to improve performance.
To test backward compatibility you can add this code to any plugin
```ruby
replace_flags do |flag_settings|
flag_settings.add(
4,
:inappropriate,
topic_type: true,
notify_type: true,
auto_action_type: true,
)
flag_settings.add(1001, :trolling, topic_type: true, notify_type: true, auto_action_type: true)
end
```
Allow admin to create custom flag which requires an additional message.
I decided to rename the old `custom_flag` into `require_message` as it is more descriptive.
Allow admin to create custom flag which requires an additional message.
I decided to rename the old `custom_flag` into `require_message` as it is more descriptive.
Followup 3094f32ff5,
this fixes an issue with the logic in this commit where
we were returning false if any of the conditionals here
were false, regardless of the type of `obj`, where we should
have only done this if `obj` was a `PostAction`, which lead
us to return false in cases where we were checking if the
user could edit their own post as anon.
When a post is created by an incoming email, we show
an envelope icon on it which then opens a modal with the
raw email contents. Previously this was staff (admin+mod)
only, but now this commit adds the `view_raw_email_allowed_groups`
site setting, so any group can be added to give users permission
to see this.
Removes duplication from LimitedEdit to see who can edit
posts, and also removes the old trust level setting check
since it's no longer necessary.
Also make it so staff can always edit since can_edit_post?
already has a staff escape hatch.
Followup fb087b7ff6
post_links_allowed_groups is an odd check tied to
unrestricted_link_posting? in PostGuardian, in that
it doesn't have an escape hatch for staff like most
of the rest of these group based settings.
It doesn't make sense to exclude admins or mods from
posting links, so just always allow them to avoid confusion.
We're changing the implementation of trust levels to use groups. Part of this is to have site settings that reference trust levels use groups instead. It converts the min_trust_to_post_links site setting to post_links_allowed_groups.
This isn't used by any of our plugins or themes, so very little fallout.
We're changing the implementation of trust levels to use groups. Part of this is to have site settings that reference trust levels use groups instead. It converts the min_trust_to_allow_self_wiki site setting to self_wiki_allowed_groups.
Nothing of note here. This is used in exactly one place, and there's no fallout.
A bug that allowed TL1 to convert other's posts to wiki.
The issue was introduced in this PR: https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/24999/files
The wiki can be created if a user is TL3 and it is their own post - default 3 for setting `SiteSetting.min_trust_to_allow_self_wiki`
In addition, a wiki can be created by staff and TL4 users for any post.
We're changing the implementation of trust levels to use groups. Part of this is to have site settings that reference trust levels use groups instead. It converts the tl4_delete_posts_and_topics site setting to delete_all_posts_and_topics_allowed_groups.
This one is a bit different from previous ones, as it's a boolean flag, and the default should be no group. Pay special attention to the migration during review.
We're changing the implementation of trust levels to use groups. Part of this is to have site settings that reference trust levels use groups instead. It converts the min_trust_to_flag_posts site setting to flag_post_allowed_groups.
Note: In the original setting, "posts" is plural. I have changed this to "post" singular in the new setting to match others.
We're changing the implementation of trust levels to use groups. Part of this is to have site settings that reference trust levels use groups instead. It converts the min_trust_to_edit_post site setting to edit_post_allowed_groups.
The old implementation will co-exist for a short period while I update any references in plugins and themes.
This change converts the min_trust_to_edit_wiki_post site setting to edit_wiki_post_allowed_groups.
See: https://meta.discourse.org/t/283408
Hides the old setting
Adds the new site setting
Add a deprecation warning
Updates to use the new setting
Adds a migration to fill in the new setting if the old setting was changed
Adds an entry to the site_setting.keywords section
Updates tests to account for the new change
After a couple of months, we will remove the email_in_min_trust setting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/117248
Allow anonymous users (logged-in, but set to anonymous posting) to like posts
---------
Co-authored-by: Emmett Ling <eling@zendesk.com>
Co-authored-by: Nat <natalie.tay@discourse.org>
* FIX: do not notify admins on suppressed categories
Avoid notifying admins on categories where they are not explicitly members
in cases where SiteSetting.suppress_secured_categories_from_admin is
enabled.
This helps keep notification stream clean and avoids admins mistakenly
being invited to discussions that should be suppressed
If a secure upload's access_control_post was trashed, and an anon user
tried to look at that upload, they would get a 500 error rather than
the correct 403 because of an error inside the PostGuardian logic.
When loading posts in a topic, the topic level guardian
checks are run multiple times even though all the posts belong to the
same topic. Profiling in production revealed that this accounted for a
significant amount of request time for a user that is not staff or anon.
Therefore, we're optimizing this by adding memoizing the topic level
calls in `PostGuardian`. Speficifally, the result of
`TopicGuardian#can_see_topic?` and `PostGuardian#can_create_post?`
method calls are memoized per topic.
Locally profiling shows a significant improvement for normal users
loading a topic with 100 posts.
Benchmark script command: `ruby script/bench.rb --unicorn --skip-bundle-assets --iterations 100`
Before:
```
topic user:
50: 114
75: 117
90: 122
99: 209
topic.json user:
50: 67
75: 69
90: 72
99: 162
```
After:
```
topic user:
50: 101
75: 104
90: 107
99: 184
topic.json user:
50: 53
75: 53
90: 56
99: 138
```
cf. e62e93f83a
This PR also makes it so `bot` (negative ID) and `system` users are always allowed
to send PMs, since the old conditional was just based on `enable_personal_messages`
* REFACTOR: Improve reusability by Decoupling flag modal from flag target.
We want chat message's flags to have the same features as topic and posts' flags, but we prefer not having to duplicate core's logic. This PR moves target specific bits to different classes, allowing plugins to flag custom things by
providing their own.
* A couple of fixes for the flag modal:
- Make sure buttons are disabled until a flag type is selected.
- Don't throw an error when checking if the user can undo an action on a deleted topic.
- Disable flagging on deleted topics.
This will replace `enable_personal_messages` and
`min_trust_to_send_messages`, this commit introduces
the setting `personal_message_enabled_groups`
and uses it in all places that `enable_personal_messages`
and `min_trust_to_send_messages` currently apply.
A migration is included to set `personal_message_enabled_groups`
based on the following rules:
* If `enable_personal_messages` was false, then set
`personal_message_enabled_groups` to `3`, which is
the staff auto group
* If `min_trust_to_send_messages` is not default (1)
and the above condition is false, then set the
`personal_message_enabled_groups` setting to
the appropriate auto group based on the trust level
* Otherwise just set `personal_message_enabled_groups` to
11 which is the TL1 auto group
After follow-up PRs to plugins using these old settings, we will be
able to drop the old settings from core, in the meantime I've added
DEPRECATED notices to their descriptions and added them
to the deprecated site settings list.
This commit also introduces a `_map` shortcut method definition
for all `group_list` site settings, e.g. `SiteSetting.personal_message_enabled_groups`
also has `SiteSetting.personal_message_enabled_groups_map` available,
which automatically splits the setting by `|` and converts it into
an array of integers.
* FIX: Do not allow to remove like if topic is archived
* FIX: Always show like button
The like button used to be hidden if the topic was archived and it had
no likes. This commit changes that to always show the like button, but
with a not-allowed cursor if the topic is archived.
We have not used anything related to bookmarks for PostAction
or UserAction records since 2020, bookmarks are their own thing
now. Deleting all this is just cleaning up old cruft.
Sometimes administrators want to permanently delete posts and topics
from the database. To make sure that this is done for a good reasons,
administrators can do this only after one minute has passed since the
post was deleted or immediately if another administrator does it.
This PR adds a new category setting which is a column in the `categories` table, `allow_unlimited_owner_edits_on_first_post`.
What this does is:
* Inside the `can_edit_post?` method of `PostGuardian`, if the current user editing a post is the owner of the post, it is the first post, and the topic's category has `allow_unlimited_owner_edits_on_first_post`, then we bypass the check for `LimitedEdit#edit_time_limit_expired?` on that post.
* Also, similar to wiki topics, in `PostActionNotifier#after_create_post_revision` we send a notification to all users watching a topic when the OP is edited in a topic with the category setting `allow_unlimited_owner_edits_on_first_post` enabled.
This is useful for forums where there is a Marketplace or similar category, where topics are created and then updated indefinitely by the OP rather than the OP making new topics or additional replies. In a way this acts similar to a wiki that only one person can edit.
Disabling shared drafts used to leave topics in an inconsistent state
where they were not displayed as shared drafts and thus there was no
way of publishing them. Moreover, they were accessible just to users
who have permissions to create shared drafts.
This commit adds another permission check that is used for most
operations and the old can_create_shared_draft? remains used just when
creating a new shared draft.
These are a few small tweaks that slightly improve performance.
- we omitted 1 query from the post guardian which could cause an N+1
- cook_url has been sped up a bit
- url helper avoids re-creating sets for no reason
You can let non-staff users use shared drafts by modifying the `shared_drafts_min_trust_level` site setting. These users must have access to the shared draft category.
