Firefox does not return a PerformanceMeasure object when using
performance.mark and performance.measure, even though MDN says it
should https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Performance/measure#return_value
So for now, we disable the upload instrumentation with a test
to see if a PerformanceMeasure (or anything really) is returned.
When creating a reply after already navigating out of the
topic (e.g. open the reply composer, go to a different topic,
then create the post), the _removeDeleteOnOwnerReplyBookmarks
function was erroring because it relied on the topic model
being present.
We can skip this function altogether if the topic model is _not_
present, because the PostCreator already takes care of deleting
bookmarks with the on_owner_reply auto_delete_preference. The
_removeDeleteOnOwnerReplyBookmarks function just cleans up the
in-memory post stream and topic model.
In the user bookmark list, when we show the excerpt of the bookmark
(which is usually just the bookmarked post excerpt), we want to show
the first unread post's excerpt instead for for_topic bookmarks. This
is because when the user clicks on that bookmark link, they are taken
to the first unread post in the topic, not the OP, as per:
27699648ef
This commit allows for measuring the time taken for
individual uploads via the new uppy interfaces, only
if the enable_upload_debug_mode site setting is enabled.
Also in this PR, for upload errors with a specific message
locally, we return the real message to show in the modal
instead of the upload.failed message so the developer
does not have to dig around in logs.
The file size error messages for max_image_size_kb and
max_attachment_size_kb are shown to the user in the KB
format, regardless of how large the limit is. Since we
are going to support uploading much larger files soon,
this KB-based limit soon becomes unfriendly to the end
user.
For example, if the max attachment size is set to 512000
KB, this is what the user sees:
> Sorry, the file you are trying to upload is too big (maximum
size is 512000KB)
This makes the user do math. In almost all file explorers that
a regular user would be familiar width, the file size is shown
in a format based on the maximum increment (e.g. KB, MB, GB).
This commit changes the behaviour to output a humanized file size
instead of the raw KB. For the above example, it would now say:
> Sorry, the file you are trying to upload is too big (maximum
size is 512 MB)
This humanization also handles decimals, e.g. 1536KB = 1.5 MB
This commit also hides a number of options which are not used during Discourse development.
Change have been tested on both the legacy `/qunit` route, and the Ember CLI `/tests` route.
This adds support for `qunit_skip_core`, `qunit_skip_plugins` and `qunit_single_plugin` parameters on the Ember CLI `/tests` route using the `addModuleExcludeMatcher` API. Legacy support is maintained for the `/qunit` route.
".search-menu" matches the parent element of the element that was
previously selected. This is a better choice because it offers some
flexibility over the DOM structure without breaking the keyboard
shortcuts.
Instead of going to the OP of the topic for topic-level bookmarks
(which are bookmarks where for_topic is true) when clicking on the
bookmark in the quick access menu or on the user bookmark list,
this commit takes the user to the last unread post in
the topic instead. This should be generally more useful than landing
on the unchanging OP.
To make this work nicely, I needed to add the last_read_post_number to
the BookmarkQuery based on the TopicUser association. It should not add
too much extra weight to the query, because it is limited to the user
that we are fetching bookmarks for.
Also fixed an issue where the bookmark serializer highest_post_number was
not taking into account whether the user was staff, which is when we
should use highest_staff_post_number instead.
* DEV: use active record `save!` instead of mini sql.
The "save" method will trigger the before_save callback "match_primary_group_changes" for User model. Else `flair_group_id` won't be removed from the user.
* check whether the method `match_primary_group_changes` called or not.
Allows creating a bookmark with the `for_topic` flag introduced in d1d2298a4c set to true. This happens when clicking on the Bookmark button in the topic footer when no other posts are bookmarked. In a later PR, when clicking on these topic-level bookmarks the user will be taken to the last unread post in the topic, not the OP. Only the OP can have a topic level bookmark, and users can also make a post-level bookmark on the OP of the topic.
I had to do some pretty heavy refactors because most of the bookmark code in the JS topics controller was centred around instances of Post JS models, but the topic level bookmark is not centred around a post. Some refactors were just for readability as well.
Also removes some missed reminderType code from the purge in 41e19adb0d
We want to be able to skip plugins from doing any work under
certain conditions, and to be able raise their own errors if
a file being uploaded is completely incompatible with the concept
of the plugin if it is enabled. For example, the UppyChecksum plugin
is happy to skip hashing large files, but the UppyUploadEncrypt
plugin from discourse-encrypt relies on the file being encrypted
to do anything with the upload, so it is considered a blocking
error if the user uploads a file that is too large.
This improves the base functions available in uppy-plugin-base and
extendable-uploader to handle this, as well as introducing a
HUGE_FILE_THRESHOLD_BYTES variable which represents 100MB in bytes,
matching the ExternalUploadManager::DOWNLOAD_LIMIT on the
server side.
discourse-encrypt to take advantage of this new functionality will
follow in discourse/discourse-encrypt#141
Also promote the `create_notification_alert` and `push_notification`
methods from instance methods to class methods so that plugins can call
them. This is temporary until we add a more comprehensive API for
extending `PostAlerter`.
Due to the way that rswag expands shared components we were getting this
warning when linting our api docs:
```
Component: "user_response" is never used.
```
This change refactors the `api/users_spec.rb` file so that it uses the
new way of doing things with a separate `user_get_response.json` schema
file rather then the old way of loading a shared response inside of the
swagger_helper.rb file.
The display name can have quotes around it, which does not work
with our current comparison of a from field (in this case Reply-To)
and another header (X-Original-From), because we are not comparing
the two values in the same way. This causes an issue where the
commit here: b88d8c8 will not
work properly; the forwarded email gets the From address instead
of the Reply-To address as intended.
We want to be able to skip plugins from doing any work under
certain conditions, and to be able raise their own errors if
a file being uploaded is completely incompatible with the concept
of the plugin if it is enabled. For example, the UppyChecksum plugin
is happy to skip hashing large files, but the UppyUploadEncrypt
plugin from discourse-encrypt relies on the file being encrypted
to do anything with the upload, so it is considered a blocking
error if the user uploads a file that is too large.
This improves the base functions available in uppy-plugin-base and
extendable-uploader to handle this, as well as introducing a
HUGE_FILE_THRESHOLD_BYTES variable which represents 100MB in bytes,
matching the ExternalUploadManager::DOWNLOAD_LIMIT on the
server side.
discourse-encrypt to take advantage of this new functionality will
follow in https://github.com/discourse/discourse-encrypt/pull/141
If parent element for range does not exists, range calculator should
return empty array. In that case duration calculations will stop because
of:
```
if (_rangeElements(element).length === 2) {
opts.duration = _calculateDuration(element);
}
```
After deleting a category, we should soft-delete the category definition topic instead of hard deleting it. Else it causes issues while doing the user merge action if the source user has an orphan post that belongs to the deleted topic.
