When creating a shared draft, we're recording topic view stats on the draft and then pass those on when the draft is published, conflating the actual view count.
This fixes that by not registering topic views if the topic is a shared draft.
This gives us daily fidelity of topic view stats
New table stores a row per topic viewed per day tracking
anonymous and logged on views
We also have a new endpoint `/t/ID/views-stats.json` to get the statistics for the topic.
Whenever one creates, updates, or deletes a post, we should keep the `topic.word_count` counter in sync.
Context - https://meta.discourse.org/t/-/308062
When converting a PM to a public topic (and vice versa), if there was a validation error (like a topic already used, or a tag required or not allowed) the error message wasn't bubbled up nor shown to the user.
This fix ensures we properly stop the conversion whenever a validation error happens and bubble up the errors back to the user so they can be informed.
Internal ref - t/128795
Ignored columns can only be dropped when its associated post-deploy
migration has been promoted to a regular migration. This is so because
Discourse doesn't rely on a schema file system to setup a brand new
database and thus the column information will be loaded by the
application first before the post-deploy migration runs.
This commit introduces a few changes as a result of
customer issues with finding why a topic was relisted.
In one case, if a user edited the OP of a topic that was
unlisted and hidden because of too many flags, the topic
would get relisted by directly changing topic.visible,
instead of going via TopicStatusUpdater.
To improve tracking we:
* Introduce a visibility_reason_id to topic which functions
in a similar way to hidden_reason_id on post, this column is
set from the various places we change topic visibility
* Fix Post#unhide! which was directly modifying topic.visible,
instead we use TopicStatusUpdater which sets visibility_reason_id
and also makes a small action post
* Show the reason topic visibility changed when hovering the
unlisted icon in topic status on topic titles
This would allow a theme component (or an API call) to reset the bump
date of a topic to a given post's created_at date.
I picked `post_id` as the parameter here because it provides a bit of
extra protection against accidentally resetting the bump date to a date
that doesn't make sense.
Settings that are using the new `file_size_restriction` types like the
`max_image_size_kb` setting need to have their values saved as integers.
This was a recent regression in 00209f03e6
that caused these values to be saved as strings.
This change also removes negatives from the validation regex because
file sizes can't be negative anyways.
Bug report: https://meta.discourse.org/t/289037
Why this change?
The `PostsController#create` action allows arbitrary topic custom fields
to be set by any user that can create a topic. Without any restrictions,
this opens us up to potential security issues where plugins may be using
topic custom fields in security sensitive areas.
What does this change do?
1. This change introduces the `register_editable_topic_custom_field` plugin
API which allows plugins to register topic custom fields that are
editable either by staff users only or all users. The registered
editable topic custom fields are stored in `DiscoursePluginRegistry` and
is called by a new method `Topic#editable_custom_fields` which is then
used in the `PostsController#create` controller action. When an unpermitted custom fields is present in the `meta_data` params,
a 400 response code is returned.
2. Removes all reference to `meta_data` on a topic as it is confusing
since we actually mean topic custom fields instead.
Some sites have a large number of categories and fetching the category
IDs or category topic IDs just to build another query can take a long
time or resources (i.e. memory).
Meta topic: https://meta.discourse.org/t/suppress-these-tags-from-summary-emails-settings-is-not-working-in-preview-digest-email/279196?u=osama
Follow-up to 477a5dd371
The `digest_suppress_tags` setting is designed to be a list of pipe-delimited tag names, but the tag-based topic suppression logic assumes (incorrectly) that the setting contains pipe-delimited tag IDs. This mismatch in expectations led to the setting not working as expected.
This PR adds a step that converts the list of tag names in the setting to their corresponding IDs, which is then used to suppress topics tagged with those specific tags.
When a user chooses to move a topic/message to an existing topic/message, they can now opt to merge the posts chronologically (using a checkbox in the UI).
Currently, when a suspended user belongs to a group PM (private message
with more than two people in it) and a staff member sends a message to
this group PM, then the suspended user will receive an email.
This happens because a suspended user can only receive emails from staff
members. But in this case, this can be seen as a bug as the expected
behavior would be instead to not send any email to the suspended user. A
staff member can participate in active discussions like any other
member and so their messages in this context shouldn’t be treated
differently than the ones from regular users.
This patch addresses this issue by checking if a suspended user receives
a message from a group PM or not. If that’s the case then an email won’t
be sent no matter if the post originated from a staff member or not.
Fixes a small issue where allowed user removes themselves from a private message before the post activity (small action) is created.
I also added some test coverage to prevent regression.
/t/92811
The #pluck_first freedom patch, first introduced by @danielwaterworth has served us well, and is used widely throughout both core and plugins. It seems to have been a common enough use case that Rails 6 introduced it's own method #pick with the exact same implementation. This allows us to retire the freedom patch and switch over to the built-in ActiveRecord method.
There is no replacement for #pluck_first!, but a quick search shows we are using this in a very limited capacity, and in some cases incorrectly (by assuming a nil return rather than an exception), which can quite easily be replaced with #pick plus some extra handling.
This TODO is irrelevant -- in reality this has not been a
perf issue, and there is not actually an N1 here. Furthermore,
this is only used in a single plugin, not in core.
Currently, `Tag#topic_count` is a count of all regular topics regardless of whether the topic is in a read restricted category or not. As a result, any users can technically poll a sensitive tag to determine if a new topic is created in a category which the user has not excess to. We classify this as a minor leak in sensitive information.
The following changes are introduced in this commit:
1. Introduce `Tag#public_topic_count` which only count topics which have been tagged with a given tag in public categories.
2. Rename `Tag#topic_count` to `Tag#staff_topic_count` which counts the same way as `Tag#topic_count`. In other words, it counts all topics tagged with a given tag regardless of the category the topic is in. The rename is also done so that we indicate that this column contains sensitive information.
3. Change all previous spots which relied on `Topic#topic_count` to rely on `Tag.topic_column_count(guardian)` which will return the right "topic count" column to use based on the current scope.
4. Introduce `SiteSetting.include_secure_categories_in_tag_counts` site setting to allow site administrators to always display the tag topics count using `Tag#staff_topic_count` instead.
When finding the candidates for `Topic.similar_to`, we will now ignore
topics in categories where `Category#search_priority` has been set to
ignore and also topics in categories which the user has specifically
muted.
Internal Ref: /t/87132
Previously we would trigger the event before the `Topic#deleted_at`
column has been updated making it hard for plugins to correctly work
with the model when its new state has not been persisted in the
database.
Before this commit, there was no way for us to efficiently check an
array of topics for which a user can see. Therefore, this commit
introduces the `TopicGuardian#can_see_topic_ids` method which accepts an
array of `Topic#id`s and filters out the ids which the user is not
allowed to see. The `TopicGuardian#can_see_topic_ids` method is meant to
maintain feature parity with `TopicGuardian#can_see_topic?` at all
times so a consistency check has been added in our tests to ensure that
`TopicGuardian#can_see_topic_ids` returns the same result as
`TopicGuardian#can_see_topic?`. In the near future, the plan is for us
to switch to `TopicGuardian#can_see_topic_ids` completely but I'm not
doing that in this commit as we have to be careful with the performance
impact of such a change.
This method is currently not being used in the current commit but will
be relied on in a subsequent commit.
This can no longer be used from the user interface and could be used to
generate useless topic invites notifications. This commit adds site
setting max_topic_invitations_per_minute to prevent invite spam.
Topic allowed user records were created for small actions, which lead to
the system user being invited in many private topics when the user
removed themselves or if a group was invited but some members already
had access.
This commits skips creating topic allowed user. They are already skipped
for the whisper posts.
Hard deleting topics that contained soft deleted posts or small actions
used to create orphan posts because only the first post was hard
deleted. This commit adds an error message if there are still posts left
in the topic that must be hard deleted first or hard deletes all small
actions too immediately (there is no other way of hard deleting a small
action because there is no wrench menu).
When viewing a topic, we execute two queries to fetch the topic's
public topic timer and slow mode timer. The former query happens to be
able to use a unique index but the latter has to do a seq scan which is
slow. The query itself is not expensive but since viewing a topic is a
hot path, the little cuts add up overtime and the query itself
contributes significantly to the load of the database.
It makes more sense to use user_ids for the UserCommScreener
introduced in fa5f3e228c since
in most cases the ID will be available, not the username. This
was discovered while starting work on a plugin that will
use this. In the cases where only usernames are available
the extra query is negligble.
The idea behind this refactor is to centralise all of the user ignoring / muting / disallow PM checks in a single place, so they can be used consistently in core as well as for plugins like chat, while improving the main bulk of the checks to run in a single fast non-AR query.
Also fixed up the invite error when someone is muting/ignoring the user that is trying to invite them to the topic.
Before, whispers were only available for staff members.
Config has been changed to allow to configure privileged groups with access to whispers. Post migration was added to move from the old setting into the new one.
I considered having a boolean column `whisperer` on user model similar to `admin/moderator` for performance reason. Finally, I decided to keep looking for groups as queries are only done for current user and didn't notice any N+1 queries.
Updates automatically data on the stats section of the topic.
It will update automatically the following information: likes, replies and last reply (timestamp and user)
This commit introduces a new use_polymorphic_bookmarks site setting
that is default false and hidden, that will be used to help continuous
development of polymorphic bookmarks. This setting **should not** be
enabled anywhere in production yet, it is purely for local development.
This commit uses the setting to enable create/update/delete actions
for polymorphic bookmarks on the server and client side. The bookmark
interactions on topics/posts are all usable. Listing, searching,
sending bookmark reminders, and other edge cases will be handled
in subsequent PRs.
Comprehensive UI tests will be added in the final PR -- we already
have them for regular bookmarks, so it will just be a matter of
changing them to be for polymorphic bookmarks.
