This fixes a bug in the create invite API where if you passed in an
integer for the group_ids field it would fail to add the user to the
specified group.
added site toggle functionality through site settings
added tests to implemented feature
Introduced suggested correction
renamed find_new_topic method and deleted click_new_topic_button method
After this change, in order to join a chat channel, a user needs to be in a group with at least “Reply” permission for the category. If the user only has “See” permission, they are able to preview the channel, but not join it or send messages. The auto-join function also follows this new restriction.
---------
Co-authored-by: Martin Brennan <martin@discourse.org>
We were giving topics with repeated words extra weight in search index.
This meant that it was trivial to stuff words into title to dominate in search
given we search for exact title matches first.
The following tweak means that:
`invite invited invites`
and
`invite some stuff`
Both rank the same for title searching.
Titles are short and punchy, duplicating words should not give special
weight.
Requires a full reindex to take effect.
This fixes the api documentation for the create invite api endpoint so
that it uses the `group_ids` param when specifying the group instead of
the incorrect `group_id` param.
This commit fixes an issue where the Likes Received notification
count in the user digest email was not affected by the
since/last_seen date for the user, which meant that no matter
how long it had been since the user visited the count was
always constant.
Now instead for the Likes Received count, we only count the
unread notifications of that type since the user was last
seen.
The current limit (250 characters) is too low, as we have some
translations used for our badge descriptions that result in a
description length of 264 characters.
To be on the safe side, the limit is now set to 500 characters.
A category's slug can be encoded when
`SiteSetting.slug_generation_method` has been set to "encoded". As a
result, we have to support non ASCII characters as well.
This commit adds support for excluding categories when using the
`category:` filter with the `-` prefix. For example,
`-category:category-slug` will exclude all topics that belong to the
category with slug "category-slug" and all of its sub-categories.
To only exclude a particular category and not all of its sub-categories,
the `-` prefix can be used with the `=` prefix. For example,
`-=category:category-slug` will only exclude topics that belong to the
category with slug "category-slug". Topics in the sub-categories of
"category-slug" will still be included.
This amends it so our cached counting reliant specs run in synchronize mode
When running async there are situations where data is left over in the table
after a transactional test. This means that repeat runs of the test suite
fail.
What is the problem?
We are relying on RSpec custom matchers in system tests by defining
predicates in page objects. The problem is that this can result in a
system test unnecessarily waiting up till the full duration of
Capybara's default wait time when the RSpec custom matcher is used with
`not_to`. Considering this topic page object where we have a `has_post?`
predicate defined.
```
class Topic < PageObject
def has_post?
has_css?('something')
end
end
```
The assertion `expect(Topic.new).not_to have_post` will end up waiting
the full Capybara's default wait time since the RSpec custom matcher is
calling Capybara's `has_css?` method which will wait until the selector
appear. If the selector has already disappeared by the time the
assertion is called, we end up waiting for something that will never
exists.
This commit fixes such cases by introducing new predicates that uses
the `has_no_*` versions of Capybara's node matchers.
For future reference, `to have_css` and `not_to have_css` is safe to sue
because the RSpec matcher defined by Capbyara is smart enough to call
`has_css?` or `has_no_css?` based on the expectation of the assertion.
Specifying more than two tag names when using the `tag:` filter was not
working because of a bug in the code where only the first two value in
the `tag:` filter was being selected.
What is the problem?
Consider the following timeline:
1. OP starts a topic.
2. Troll responds snarkily.
3. Flagger flags the post as “inappropriate”.
4. Admin agrees and hides the post.
5. Troll ninja-edits the post within the grace period, but still snarky.
6. Flagger flags the post as inappropriate again.
The current behaviour is that the flagger is met with an error saying the post has been reviewed and can't be flagged again for the same reason.
The desired behaviour is after someone has edited a post, it should be flaggable again.
Why is this happening?
This is related to the ninja-edit feature, where within a set grace period no new revision is created, but a new revision is required to flag the same post for the same reason.
So essentially there is a window between the naughty corner cooldown where a flagged post can't be edited, and the ninja-edit grace period, where an edit can be made without a new revision. Posts that are edited within this window can't be re-flagged by the same user.
|-----------------|-------------------------------|
^ Flag accepted | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 🥷🏻 ~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| ^ Editing grace period over
^ Naughty corner cooldown over
How does this fix it?
We already create a new revision when ninja-editing a post with a pending flag. The issue above happens only in the case where the flag is already accepted.
This change extends the existing behaviour so that a new revision is created when ninja-editing any flagged post, regardless of the status of the flag. (Deleted flags excluded.)
This should also help with posterity, avoiding situations where a successfully flagged post looks innocuous in the history because it was ninja-edited, and vice versa.
* DEV: move sidebar community section to database
Before, community section was hard-coded. In the future, we are planning to allow admins to edit it. Therefore, it has to be moved to database to `custom_sections` table.
Few steps and simplifications has to be made:
- custom section was hidden behind `enable_custom_sidebar_sections` feature flag. It has to be deleted so all forums, see community section;
- migration to add `section_type` column to sidebar section to show it is a special type;
- migration to add `segment` column to sidebar links to determine if link should be displayed in primary section or in more section;
- simplify more section to have one level only (secondary section links are merged);
- ensure that links like `everything` are correctly tracking state;
- make user an anonymous links position consistence. For example, from now on `faq` link for user and anonymous is visible in more tab;
- delete old community-section template.
SearchIndexer is only automatically disabled in `before_all` and `before` blocks which means at the start
of test runs. Enabling the SearchIndexer in one `fab!` block will affect
all other `fab!` blocks which is not ideal as we may be indexing stuff
for search when we don't need to.
What is the problem?
The system tests incorrectly assumes that the discobot user which is
seeded by a core plugin will always be present. This is not true as the
discobot user will only be seeded when the test databases are migrated
with plugins enabled. If we migrate test databases without plugins being
enabled, the core system tests should still pass.
This header is used by Microsoft Exchange to indicate when certain types of
autoresponses should not be generated for an email.
It triggers our "is this mail autogenerated?" detection, but should not be used
for this purpose.
`TopicQuery#latest_results` which was being used by
`TopicQuery#list_filter` defaults to ordering by `Topic#bumped_at` in
descending order and that was taking precedent over the order scopes
being applied by `TopicsFilter`.
This allows multiple ordering to be specified by using a comma seperated string.
For example, `order:created,views` would order the topics by
`Topic#created_at` and then `Topic#views.
An older change about optimising images caused the selector that adds lightboxing not to apply on quoted images. This fixes that. The selector is now not applicable as optimisation occurs in a separate place.
This change allows quoted images to be opened in a lightbox.
This new modifier can be used by plugins to modify search ordering.
Specifically plugins such as discourse_solved can amend search ordering
so solved topics bump to the top.
Also correct edge case where low and high sort priority categories did not
order correctly when it came to closed/archived
Many blog posts use these to illustrate and images were previously omitted
Additionally strip superfluous HTML and BODY tags from embed HTML.
This was incorrectly returned from server.
This commit adds support for the following ordering filters:
1. `order:activity` which orders the topics by `Topic#bumped_at` in descending order
2. `order:activity-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#bumped_at` in ascending order
3. `order:latest-post` which orders the topics by `Topic#last_posted_at` in descending order
4. `order:latest-post-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#last_posted_at` in ascending order
5. `order:created` which orders the topics by `Topic#created_at` in descending order
6. `order:created-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#created_at` in ascending order
7. `order:views` which orders the topics by `Topic#views` in descending order
8. `order:views-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#views` in ascending order
9. `order:likes` which orders the topics by `Topic#likes` in descending order
10. `order:likes-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#likes` in ascending order
11. `order:likes-op` which orders the topics by `Post#like_count` of the first post in the topic in descending order
12. `order:likes-op-asc` which orders the topics by `Post#like_count` of the first post in the topic in ascending order
13. `order:posters` which orders the topics by `Topic#participant_count` in descending order
14. `order:posters-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#participant_count` in ascending order
15. `order:category` which orders the topics by `Category#name` of the topic's category in descending order
16. `order:category-asc` which orders the topics by `Category#name` of the topic's category in ascending order
Multiple order filters can be composed together and the order of ordering is applied based on the position of the filter
in the query string. For example, `order:views order:created` will order the topics by `Topic#views` in descending order
and then order the topics by `Topics#created_at` in descending order.
