Commit Graph

331 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Osama Sayegh
a509441148
DEV: Include unread topics in New topic lists and link to it in sidebar (#20432)
This commit introduces a few experimental changes to the New topics list and "Everything" link in the sidebar:

1. Make the New topics list include unread topics
2. Make the Everything section in the sidebar link to the New topics list (`/new`)
3. Remove "unread" or "new" text next to the count and keep the count
4. The count is a sum of new and unread topics counts

All of these of changes are behind an off-by-default feature flag. I've not written extensive tests for these changes because they're highly experimental.

Internal topic: t/77234.
2023-02-27 15:11:01 +03:00
Loïc Guitaut
f7c57fbc19 DEV: Enable unless cops
We discussed the use of `unless` internally and decided to enforce
available rules from rubocop to restrict its most problematic uses.
2023-02-21 10:30:48 +01:00
Osama Sayegh
5423e7c5b7
DEV: Add backend support for unread and new topics list (#20293)
This commit adds backend support for a new topics list that combines both the current unread and new topics lists. We're going to experiment with this new list (name TBD) internally and decide if this feature is something that we want to fully build.

Internal topic: t/77234.
2023-02-16 16:02:09 +03:00
Ted Johansson
25a226279a
DEV: Replace #pluck_first freedom patch with AR #pick in core (#19893)
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.
2023-02-13 12:39:45 +08:00
Bianca Nenciu
f55e0fe791
SECURITY: Update to exclude tag topic filter (#20006)
Ignores tags specified in exclude_tag topics param that a user does not
have access to.

Co-authored-by: Blake Erickson <o.blakeerickson@gmail.com>
2023-01-25 18:56:22 +02:00
Daniel Waterworth
666536cbd1
DEV: Prefer \A and \z over ^ and $ in regexes (#19936) 2023-01-20 12:52:49 -06:00
Ted Johansson
9cdeb93375
FEATURE: Allow TL4 users to see unlisted topics (#19890)
TL4 users can already list and unlist topics, but they can't see
the unlisted topics. This change brings this to par by allowing
TL4 users to also see unlisted topics.
2023-01-17 16:50:15 +08:00
Bianca Nenciu
0fea826f42
FIX: Validate tags parameter of TopicQuery (#19830)
Recently, we have seen some errors related to invalid tags value being
passed to TopicQuery.
2023-01-16 19:20:19 +02:00
David Taylor
6417173082
DEV: Apply syntax_tree formatting to lib/* 2023-01-09 12:10:19 +00:00
Isaac Janzen
e5349e43af
DEV: Update group moderator behavior to better mimic staff (#19618)
# Context
When a topic is reviewable by a group we give those group moderators some admin abilities including the ability to delete a topic.

# Problem
There are two main problems:

1. Currently when a group moderator deletes a topic they are redirected to root (not the same for staff)
2. Viewing the categories deleted topics (`c/foo/1/?status=deleted`) does not display the deleted topic to the group moderator (not the same for staff).

# Fix
If the `deleted_by` user is part a group that matches the `reviewable_by_group` on a topic then don't redirect. This is the default interaction for staff to give them the ability to do things like restore the topic in case it was accidentally deleted.

To render the deleted topics as expected for the group moderator I am utilizing [the guardian scope of `guardian.can_see_deleted_topics?` for said category](https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/19618/files#diff-288e61b8bacdb29d9c2e05b42da6837b0036dcf1867332d977ca7c5e74a44297R802-R803)
2022-12-29 10:07:03 -06:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
a8ee56ebee
PERF: Remove unnecessary query from TopicQuery.remove_muted_tags (#19586)
When `default_tags_muted` site settings has not been set, there is no
need to execute the query.
2022-12-23 04:29:17 +08:00
Daniel Waterworth
167181f4b7
DEV: Quote values when constructing SQL (#18827)
All of these cases should already be safe, but still good to quote for
"defense in depth".
2022-11-01 14:05:13 -05:00
Blake Erickson
124ee4b7bb
Revert "FEATURE: Hide Privacy Policy and TOS topics (#18533)" (#18633)
This reverts commit 49abcf965b.
2022-10-18 10:26:34 +11:00
Blake Erickson
49abcf965b
FEATURE: Hide Privacy Policy and TOS topics (#18533)
* FEATURE: Hide Privacy Policy and TOS topics

As a way to simplify new sites this change will hide the privacy policy
and the TOS topics from the topic list. They can still be accessed and
edited though.

* add tests
2022-10-10 17:19:18 -06:00
Martin Brennan
f5194aadd3
DEV: Remove usages of enable_personal_messages (#18437)
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`
2022-10-05 10:50:20 +10:00
Martin Brennan
7152345ee7
FIX: list_suggested_for conditional for personal_message_enabled_groups (#18373)
Follow-up to e62e93f83a,
misplaced a bracket and changed the meaning of the conditional.
2022-09-27 16:54:44 +10:00
Martin Brennan
e62e93f83a
FEATURE: Introduce personal_message_enabled_groups setting (#18042)
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.
2022-09-26 13:58:40 +10:00
jbrw
73b2522261
FIX: Allow match_all_tags to be passed as a URL param (#17972)
`TopicQueryParams` allows for `match_all_tags` to be passed as a query parameter. `TagsController` forces the value to be true.

This change allows a value to be passed, and only sets it to true if no value has been set. It then uses `ActiveModel::Type::Boolean.new.cast` to compare the value.
2022-08-19 15:41:56 -04:00
David Taylor
497d9849d3
FIX: Ensure all public topic-query options can be used via Ember (#17706) 2022-07-29 09:03:53 +10:00
Krzysztof Kotlarek
09932738e5
FEATURE: whispers available for groups (#17170)
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.
2022-06-30 10:18:12 +10:00
Osama Sayegh
5176c689e9
UX: Change wording for 'regular' categories to 'normal' (#17134)
At some point in the past we decided to rename the 'regular' notification state of topics/categories to 'normal'. However, some UI copy was missed when the initial renaming was done so this commit changes the spots that were missed to the new name.
2022-06-20 06:49:33 +03:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
82ac698d4f
FIX: Missing tracked sub category topics from tracked topic list (#17034)
Follow-up to 7ae647d092
2022-06-08 10:45:59 +08:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
1e9f132b15
FIX: Topic list nav items count not respecting tracked filter. (#16935)
This commit seeks to only handle the `f=tracked` and `filter=tracked`
query params for a topic list. There are other "hidden" filters for a
topic list which can be activated by passing the right query param to
the request. However, they are hidden because there is no way to
activate those filters via the UI. We are handling the `f=tracked`
filter because we will soon be adding a link that allows a user to
quickly view their tracked topics.
2022-06-01 14:54:42 +08:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
7ae647d092
FIX: tracked filter did not account for max_category_nesting of 3 (#16963) 2022-06-01 12:09:58 +08:00
Martin Brennan
fbcc35b417
DEV: Remove PostAction/UserAction bookmark refs (#16681)
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.
2022-05-10 10:42:18 +10:00
Krzysztof Kotlarek
a7d43cf1ec
FEATURE: mute subcategory when parent category is muted (#15966)
When parent category or grandparent category is muted, then category should be muted as well.

Still, it can be overridden by setting individual subcategory notification level.

CategoryUser record is not created, mute for subcategories is purely virtual.
2022-02-17 00:42:02 +01:00
Bianca Nenciu
694205cc0c
DEV: Add include_all_pms option to TopicQuery (#15742)
This is intended for use by plugins which are building their own
topic lists, and want to include PMs alongside regular topics (e.g.
discourse-assign). It does not get used directly in core.
2022-02-11 14:46:23 +02:00
Vinoth Kannan
c47a526371
FIX: exclude topics from muted tag in category featured list. (#14925)
Topics from muted tags were visible in the categories page's featured topics section since we didn't filter it before.
2021-11-16 12:10:50 +05:30
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
e3c724f79f
PERF: Use a subquery when excluding a tag from topic query. (#14577)
When a tag with alot of topics is used, we end up allocating a Ruby
array of all the topic ids. Instead, we can just use a subquery here and
handle all of the exclusion logic in PG.

Follow-up to ae13839f98
2021-10-13 09:20:56 +11:00
Vinoth Kannan
fd9a5bc023
FIX: use category's default sort order in latest & unseen filters only. (#14571)
Previously, even the top topics filter rendered all the topics in default sort order.
2021-10-12 10:25:03 +05:30
Robin Ward
ae13839f98 FEATURE: Adds an API to exclude a tag from a TopicQuery
To exclude a tag from a topic list, add the `exclude_tag` query
parameter. For example: `latest?exclude_tag=music`
2021-10-06 16:07:08 -04:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
cd64e88711
PERF: Improve database query perf when loading topics for a category. (#14416)
* PERF: Improve database query perf when loading topics for a category.

Instead of left joining the `topics` table against `categories` by filtering with `categories.id`,
we can improve the query plan by filtering against `topics.category_id`
first before joining which helps to reduce the number of rows in the
topics table that has to be joined against the other tables and also
make better use of our existing index.

The following is a before and after of the query plan for a category
with many subcategories.

Before:

```
                                                                                                       QUERY PLAN

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Limit  (cost=1.28..747.09 rows=30 width=12) (actual time=85.502..2453.727 rows=30 loops=1)
   ->  Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=1.28..566518.36 rows=22788 width=12) (actual time=85.501..2453.722 rows=30 loops=1)
         Join Filter: (category_users.category_id = topics.category_id)
         Filter: ((topics.category_id = 11) OR (COALESCE(category_users.notification_level, 1) <> 0) OR (tu.notification_level > 1))
         ->  Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=1.00..566001.58 rows=22866 width=20) (actual time=85.494..2453.702 rows=30 loops=1)
               Filter: ((COALESCE(tu.notification_level, 1) > 0) AND ((topics.category_id <> 11) OR (topics.pinned_at IS NULL) OR ((t
opics.pinned_at <= tu.cleared_pinned_at) AND (tu.cleared_pinned_at IS NOT NULL))))
               Rows Removed by Filter: 1
               ->  Nested Loop  (cost=0.57..528561.75 rows=68606 width=24) (actual time=85.472..2453.562 rows=31 loops=1)
                     Join Filter: ((topics.category_id = categories.id) AND ((categories.topic_id <> topics.id) OR (categories.id = 1
1)))
                     Rows Removed by Join Filter: 13938306
                     ->  Index Scan using index_topics_on_bumped_at on topics  (cost=0.42..100480.05 rows=715549 width=24) (actual ti
me=0.010..633.015 rows=464623 loops=1)
                           Filter: ((deleted_at IS NULL) AND ((archetype)::text <> 'private_message'::text))
                           Rows Removed by Filter: 105321
                     ->  Materialize  (cost=0.14..36.04 rows=30 width=8) (actual time=0.000..0.002 rows=30 loops=464623)
                           ->  Index Scan using categories_pkey on categories  (cost=0.14..35.89 rows=30 width=8) (actual time=0.006.
.0.040 rows=30 loops=1)
                                 Index Cond: (id = ANY ('{11,53,57,55,54,56,112,94,107,115,116,117,97,95,102,103,101,105,99,114,106,1
13,104,98,100,96,108,109,110,111}'::integer[]))
               ->  Index Scan using index_topic_users_on_topic_id_and_user_id on topic_users tu  (cost=0.43..0.53 rows=1 width=16) (a
ctual time=0.004..0.004 rows=0 loops=31)
                     Index Cond: ((topic_id = topics.id) AND (user_id = 1103877))
         ->  Materialize  (cost=0.28..2.30 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.000..0.000 rows=0 loops=30)
               ->  Index Scan using index_category_users_on_user_id_and_last_seen_at on category_users  (cost=0.28..2.29 rows=1 width
=8) (actual time=0.004..0.004 rows=0 loops=1)
                     Index Cond: (user_id = 1103877)
 Planning Time: 1.359 ms
 Execution Time: 2453.765 ms
(23 rows)
```

After:

```
                                                                                                                            QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Limit  (cost=1.28..438.55 rows=30 width=12) (actual time=38.297..657.215 rows=30 loops=1)
   ->  Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=1.28..195944.68 rows=13443 width=12) (actual time=38.296..657.211 rows=30 loops=1)
         Filter: ((categories.topic_id <> topics.id) OR (topics.category_id = 11))
         Rows Removed by Filter: 29
         ->  Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=1.13..193462.59 rows=13443 width=16) (actual time=38.289..657.092 rows=59 loops=1)
               Join Filter: (category_users.category_id = topics.category_id)
               Filter: ((topics.category_id = 11) OR (COALESCE(category_users.notification_level, 1) <> 0) OR (tu.notification_level > 1))
               ->  Nested Loop Left Join  (cost=0.85..193156.79 rows=13489 width=20) (actual time=38.282..657.059 rows=59 loops=1)
                     Filter: ((COALESCE(tu.notification_level, 1) > 0) AND ((topics.category_id <> 11) OR (topics.pinned_at IS NULL) OR ((topics.pinned_at <= tu.cleared_pinned_at) AND (tu.cleared_pinned_at IS NOT NULL))))
                     Rows Removed by Filter: 1
                     ->  Index Scan using index_topics_on_bumped_at on topics  (cost=0.42..134521.06 rows=40470 width=24) (actual time=38.267..656.850 rows=60 loops=1)
                           Filter: ((deleted_at IS NULL) AND ((archetype)::text <> 'private_message'::text) AND (category_id = ANY ('{11,53,57,55,54,56,112,94,107,115,116,117,97,95,102,103,101,105,99,114,106,113,104,98,100,96,108,109,110,111}'::integer[])))
                           Rows Removed by Filter: 569895
                     ->  Index Scan using index_topic_users_on_topic_id_and_user_id on topic_users tu  (cost=0.43..1.43 rows=1 width=16) (actual time=0.003..0.003 rows=0 loops=60)
                           Index Cond: ((topic_id = topics.id) AND (user_id = 1103877))
               ->  Materialize  (cost=0.28..2.30 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.000..0.000 rows=0 loops=59)
                     ->  Index Scan using index_category_users_on_user_id_and_last_seen_at on category_users  (cost=0.28..2.29 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.004..0.004 rows=0 loops=1)
                           Index Cond: (user_id = 1103877)
         ->  Index Scan using categories_pkey on categories  (cost=0.14..0.17 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=0.001..0.001 rows=1 loops=59)
               Index Cond: (id = topics.category_id)
 Planning Time: 1.633 ms
 Execution Time: 657.255 ms
(22 rows)
```

* PERF: Optimize index on topics bumped_at.

Replace `index_topics_on_bumped_at` index with a partial index on `Topic#bumped_at` filtered by archetype since there is already another index that covers private topics.
2021-09-28 10:05:00 +08:00
Osama Sayegh
ec352a1969
FEATURE: Order pinned topics by their pinned_at column (#14090)
Currently, pinned topics are ordered by the `bumped_at` column. This behavior is not desired because it gives admins no control over the order of pinned topics. This PR makes pinned topics ordered by the `pinned_at` column. A topic that is pinned last appears first in topic lists. If an admin wants an already pinned topic to appear first in the list of pinned topics, they'll have to unpin that topic and pin it again.

Meta topic: https://meta.discourse.org/t/how-do-i-set-the-order-of-pinned-topics/16935/23?u=osama.
2021-08-19 14:43:58 +03:00
Andrei Prigorshnev
622859dbe6
FEATURE: add Unseen view (#13977)
This view is the same as Latest except it hides the topics you have fully read. Based on this plugin of @davidtaylorhq https://meta.discourse.org/t/simple-unread-list-plugin-discourse-simple-unread/70013.
2021-08-10 18:30:34 +04:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
2c046cc670 FEATURE: Dismiss new and unread for PM inboxes. 2021-08-05 12:56:15 +08:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
016efeadf6
FEATURE: New and Unread messages for user personal messages. (#13603)
* FEATURE: New and Unread messages for user personal messages.

Co-authored-by: awesomerobot <kris.aubuchon@discourse.org>
2021-08-02 12:41:41 +08:00
Robin Ward
7b45a5ce55 FIX: Better and more secure validation of periods for TopicQuery
Co-authored-by: Martin Brennan <mjrbrennan@gmail.com>
2021-07-23 14:24:44 -04:00
Martin Brennan
f41908ad5b
SECURITY: Validate period param for top topic routes (#13818)
Fixes a possible SQL injection vector
2021-07-22 16:31:53 +10:00
Dan Ungureanu
6ea4bbd2ec
DEV: Prefer .pluck_first over .pluck.first (#13607) 2021-07-02 10:03:54 +08:00
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
7719453fb7 DEV: Don't eager load tags when tagging is not enabled. 2021-06-28 16:00:10 +08:00
Martin Brennan
6fe78cd542
FIX: Make sure reset-new for tracked is not limited by per_page count (#13395)
When dismissing new topics for the Tracked filter, the dismiss was
limited to 30 topics which is the default per page count for TopicQuery.
This happened even if you specified which topic IDs you were
selectively dismissing. This PR fixes that bug, and also moves
the per_page_count into a DEFAULT_PER_PAGE_COUNT for the TopicQuery
so it can be stubbed in tests.

Also moves the unused stub_const method into the spec helpers
for cases like this; it is much better to handle this in one place
with an ensure. In a follow up PR I will clean up other specs that
do the same thing and make them use stub_const.
2021-06-17 08:20:09 +10:00
Kane York
c780ae9d25
FEATURE: Add a messages view for all official warnings of a user (#12659)
Moderators are allowed to see the warnings list, with an access warning.

https://meta.discourse.org/t/why-arent-warnings-easily-accessible-like-suspensions-are/164043
2021-06-14 14:01:17 -07:00
Martin Brennan
e15c86e8c5
DEV: Topic tracking state improvements (#13218)
I merged this PR in yesterday, finally thinking this was done https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/12958 but then a wild performance regression occurred. These are the problem methods:

1aa20bd681/app/serializers/topic_tracking_state_serializer.rb (L13-L21)

Turns out date comparison is super expensive on the backend _as well as_ the frontend.

The fix was to just move the `treat_as_new_topic_start_date` into the SQL query rather than using the slower `UserOption#treat_as_new_topic_start_date` method in ruby. After this change, 1% of the total time is spent with the `created_in_new_period` comparison instead of ~20%.

----

History:

Original PR which had to be reverted **https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/12555**. See the description there for what this PR is achieving, plus below.

The issue with the original PR is addressed in 92ef54f402

If you went to the `x unread` link for a tag Chrome would freeze up and possibly crash, or eventually unfreeze after nearly 10 mins. Other routes for unread/new were similarly slow. From profiling the issue was the `sync` function of `topic-tracking-state.js`, which calls down to `isNew` which in turn calls `moment`, a change I had made in the PR above. The time it takes locally with ~1400 topics in the tracking state is 2.3 seconds.

To solve this issue, I have moved these calculations for "created in new period" and "unread not too old" into the tracking state serializer.

When I was looking at the profiler I also noticed this issue which was just compounding the problem. Every time we modify topic tracking state we recalculate the sidebar tracking/everything/tag counts. However this calls `forEachTracked` and `countTags` which can be quite expensive as they go through the whole tracking state (and were also calling the removed moment functions).

I added some logs and this was being called 30 times when navigating to a new /unread route because  `sync` is being called from `build-topic-route` (one for each topic loaded due to pagination). So I just added a debounce here and it makes things even faster.

Finally, I changed topic tracking state to use a Map so our counts of the state keys is faster (Maps have .size whereas objects you have to do Object.keys(obj) which is O(n).)

<!-- NOTE: All pull requests should have tests (rspec in Ruby, qunit in JavaScript). If your code does not include test coverage, please include an explanation of why it was omitted. -->
2021-06-02 09:06:29 +10:00
Osama Sayegh
b81b24dea2
Revert "DEV: Topic tracking state improvements (#12958)" (#13209)
This reverts commit 002c676344.

Perf regression, we will redo it.
2021-05-31 17:47:42 +10:00
Martin Brennan
002c676344
DEV: Topic tracking state improvements (#12958)
Original PR which had to be reverted **https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/12555**. See the description there for what this PR is achieving, plus below.

The issue with the original PR is addressed in 92ef54f402

If you went to the `x unread` link for a tag Chrome would freeze up and possibly crash, or eventually unfreeze after nearly 10 mins. Other routes for unread/new were similarly slow. From profiling the issue was the `sync` function of `topic-tracking-state.js`, which calls down to `isNew` which in turn calls `moment`, a change I had made in the PR above. The time it takes locally with ~1400 topics in the tracking state is 2.3 seconds.

To solve this issue, I have moved these calculations for "created in new period" and "unread not too old" into the tracking state serializer.

When I was looking at the profiler I also noticed this issue which was just compounding the problem. Every time we modify topic tracking state we recalculate the sidebar tracking/everything/tag counts. However this calls `forEachTracked` and `countTags` which can be quite expensive as they go through the whole tracking state (and were also calling the removed moment functions).

I added some logs and this was being called 30 times when navigating to a new /unread route because  `sync` is being called from `build-topic-route` (one for each topic loaded due to pagination). So I just added a debounce here and it makes things even faster.

Finally, I changed topic tracking state to use a Map so our counts of the state keys is faster (Maps have .size whereas objects you have to do Object.keys(obj) which is O(n).)
2021-05-31 09:22:28 +10:00
Martin Brennan
6d53005e8b
Revert "DEV: Improving topic tracking state code (#12555)" (#12864)
This reverts commit 45df579db0.

This was causing huge browser freezes and crashes.
2021-04-28 11:29:54 +10:00
Martin Brennan
45df579db0
DEV: Improving topic tracking state code (#12555)
The aim of this PR is to improve the topic tracking state JavaScript code and test coverage so further modifications can be made in plugins and in core. This is focused on making topic tracking state changes easier to respond to with callbacks, and changing it so all state modifications go through a single method instead of modifying `this.state` all over the place. I have also tried to improve documentation, make the code clearer and easier to follow, and make it clear what are public and private methods.

The changes I have made here should not break backwards compatibility, though there is no way to tell for sure if other plugin/theme authors are using tracking state methods that are essentially private methods. Any name changes made in the tracking-state.js code have been reflected in core.

----

We now have a `_trackedTopicLimit` in the tracking state. Previously, if a topic was neither new nor unread it was removed from the tracking state; now it is only removed if we are tracking more than `_trackedTopicLimit` topics (which is set to 4000). This is so plugins/themes adding topics with `TopicTrackingState.register_refine_method` can add topics to track that aren't necessarily new or unread, e.g. for totals counts.

Anywhere where we were doing `tracker.states["t" + data.topic_id] = newObject` has now been changed to flow through central `modifyState` and `modifyStateProp` methods. This is so state objects are not modified until they need to be (e.g. sometimes properties are set based on certain conditions) and also so we can run callback functions when the state is modified.

I added `onStateChange` and `onMessageIncrement` methods to register callbacks that are called when the state is changed and when the message count is incremented, respectively. This was done so we no longer need to do things like `@observes("trackingState.states")` in other Ember classes.

I split up giant functions like `sync` and `establishChannels` into smaller functions for readability and testability, and renamed many small functions to _functionName to designate them as private functions which not be called by consumers of `topicTrackingState`. Public functions are now all documented (well...at least ones that are not immediately obvious).

----

On the backend side, I have changed the MessageBus publish events for TopicTrackingState to send back tags and tag IDs for more channels, and done some extra code cleanup and refactoring. Plugins may override `TopicTrackingState.report` so I have made its footprint as small as possible and externalised the main parts of it into other methods.
2021-04-28 09:54:45 +10:00
Krzysztof Kotlarek
f39e7fe81d
FEATURE: New way to dismiss new topics (#11927)
This is a try to simplify logic around dismiss new topics to have one solution to work in all places - dismiss all-new, dismiss new in a specific category or even in a specific tag.
2021-02-04 11:27:34 +11:00
Dan Ungureanu
dd175537f3
FIX: Existing shared drafts should be accessible (#11915)
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.
2021-02-01 16:16:34 +02:00
Roman Rizzi
b45a30c40f
FIX: Users without shared drafts access can still have access to the category. (#11476)
This is an edge-case of 9fb3629. An admin could set the shared draft category to one where both TL2 and TL3 users have access but only give shared draft access to TL3 users. If something like this happens, we need to make sure that TL2 users won't be able to see them, and they won't be listed on latest.

Before this change, `SharedDrafts` were lazily created when a destination category was selected. We now create it alongside the topic and set the destination to the same shared draft category.
2020-12-14 16:08:20 -03:00