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_level_to_tag_topics site setting to tag_topic_allowed_groups.
We have all these calls to Group.refresh_automatic_groups! littered throughout the tests. Including tests that are seemingly unrelated to groups. This is because automatic group memberships aren't fabricated when making a vanilla user. There are two places where you'd want to use this:
You have fabricated a user that needs a certain trust level (which is now based on group membership.)
You need the system user to have a certain trust level.
In the first case, we can pass refresh_auto_groups: true to the fabricator instead. This is a more lightweight operation that only considers a single user, instead of all users in all groups.
The second case is no longer a thing after #25400.
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_level_to_tag_topics site setting to tag_topic_allowed_groups.
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_level_to_create_tag site setting to create_tag_allowed_groups.
This PR maintains backwards compatibility until we can update plugins and themes using this.
This change converts the min_trust_to_create_topic site setting to
create_topic_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 min_trust_to_create_topicsetting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/117248
* DEV: Convert approve_new_topics_unless_trust_level to groups
This change converts the `approve_new_topics_unless_trust_level` site
setting to `approve_new_topics_unless_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
`approve_new_topics_unless_trust_level` setting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/115696
* add missing translation
* Add keyword entry
* Add migration
This change converts the `approve_unless_trust_level` site setting to
`approve_unless_allowed_groups`.
See: https://meta.discourse.org/t/283408
- Adds the new site setting
- Adds a deprecation warning
- Updates core to use the new settings.
- Adds a migration to fill in the new setting of the old setting was
changed
- Adds an entry to the site_setting.keywords section
- Updates many tests to account for the new change
After a couple of months we will remove the `approve_unless_trust_level`
setting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/115696
The most common thing that we do with fab! is:
fab!(:thing) { Fabricate(:thing) }
This commit adds a shorthand for this which is just simply:
fab!(:thing)
i.e. If you omit the block, then, by default, you'll get a `Fabricate`d object using the fabricator of the same name.
In #20135 we prevented invalid inputs from being accepted in category setting form fields on the front-end. We didn't do anything on the back-end at that time, because we were still discussing which path we wanted to take. Eventually we decided we want to move this to a new CategorySetting model.
This PR moves the require_topic_approval and require_reply_approval from custom fields to the new CategorySetting model.
This PR is nearly identical to #20580, which migrated num_auto_bump_daily, but since these are slightly more sensitive, they are moved after the previous one is verified.
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`
Previously we only supported a single 'required tag group' for a category. This commit allows admins to specify multiple required tag groups, each with their own minimum tag count.
A new category_required_tag_groups database table replaces the existing columns on the categories table. Data is automatically migrated.
Tags (and tag groups) can be configured so that they can only be used in specific categories and (optionally) restrict topics in these categories to be able to add/use only these tags. These restrictions work as expected when a topic is created without going through the review queue; however, if the topic has to be reviewed by a moderator then these restrictions currently aren't checked before the topic is sent to the review queue, but they're checked later when a moderator tries to approve the topic. This is because if a user manages to submit a topic that doesn't meet the restrictions, moderators won't be able to approve and it'll be stuck in the review queue.
This PR prevents topics that don't meet the tags requirements from being sent to the review queue and shows the poster an error message that indicates which tags that cannot be used.
Internal ticket: t60562.
It's very easy to forget to add `require 'rails_helper'` at the top of every core/plugin spec file, and omissions can cause some very confusing/sporadic errors.
By setting this flag in `.rspec`, we can remove the need for `require 'rails_helper'` entirely.
