This bug is actually a Drupal issue where some edited posts have their `created` and `changed` timestamps set to the same value. But even when that happens in Drupal it still maintains the correct post order in an affected thread. This PR makes the Discourse importer also maintain the original Drupal comment order by sorting comments in the source DB by their `cid`, which is sequential and never changes. More details from this post onward:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/large-drupal-forum-migration-importer-errors-and-limitations/246939/24?u=rahim123
Remove the per user groups based site setting in favor of a global site setting as we want to roll the glimmer topic timeline out to anon users as well as site users.
- Add `enable_experimental_topic_timeline` site setting
- Remove `enable_experimental_topic_timeline_groups` site setting
When a post is created using the API and goes into the review queue, we
would return a 'null' string in the response which isn't valid JSON.
Internal ref: /t/92419
Co-authored-by: Leonardo Mosquera <ldmosquera@gmail.com>
Improvements for this PR: https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/20057
What was fixed:
- [x] Use ember transitions instead of full reload
- [x] Link was inaccurately kept active
- [x] "+ save" renamed to just "save"
- [x] Render emojis in link name
- [x] UI to set icon
- [x] Delete link is trash icon instead of "x"
- [x] Add another link to on the left and rewording
- [x] Raname "link name" -> "name", "points to" -> link
- [x] Add limits to fields
- [x] Move add section button to the bottom
Whenever we create a chat message that is `in_reply_to` another
message, we want to lazily populate the thread record for the
message chain.
If there is no thread yet for the root message in the reply chain,
we create a new thread with the appropriate details, and use that
thread ID for every message in the chain that does not yet have
a thread ID.
* Root message (ID 1) - no thread ID
* Message (ID 2, in_reply_to 1) - no thread ID
* When I as a user create a message in reply to ID 2, we create a thread and apply it to ID 1, ID 2, and the new message
If there is a thread for the root message in the reply chain, we
do not create one, and use the thread ID for the newly created chat
message.
* Root message (ID 1) - thread ID 700
* Message (ID 2, in_reply_to 1) - thread ID 700
* When I as a user create a message in reply to ID 2, we use the existing thread ID 700 for the new message
We also support passing in the `thread_id` to `ChatMessageCreator`,
which will be used when replying to a message that is already part of
a thread, and we validate whether that `thread_id` is okay in the context
of the channel and also the reply chain.
This work is always done, regardless of channel `thread_enabled` settings
or the `enable_experimental_chat_threaded_discussions` site setting.
This commit does not include a large data migration to backfill threads for
all existing reply chains, its unnecessary to do this so early in the project,
we can do this later if necessary.
This commit also includes thread considerations in the `MessageMover` class:
* If the original message and N other messages of a thread is moved,
the remaining messages in the thread have a new thread created in
the old channel and are moved to it.
* The reply chain is not preserved for moved messages, so new threads are
not created in the destination channel.
In addition to this, I added a fix to also clear the `in_reply_to_id` of messages
in the old channel which are moved out of that channel for data cleanliness.
Whenever we create a chat message that is `in_reply_to` another
message, we want to lazily populate the thread record for the
message chain.
If there is no thread yet for the root message in the reply chain,
we create a new thread with the appropriate details, and use that
thread ID for every message in the chain that does not yet have
a thread ID.
* Root message (ID 1) - no thread ID
* Message (ID 2, in_reply_to 1) - no thread ID
* When I as a user create a message in reply to ID 2, we create a thread and apply it to ID 1, ID 2, and the new message
If there is a thread for the root message in the reply chain, we
do not create one, and use the thread ID for the newly created chat
message.
* Root message (ID 1) - thread ID 700
* Message (ID 2, in_reply_to 1) - thread ID 700
* When I as a user create a message in reply to ID 2, we use the existing thread ID 700 for the new message
We also support passing in the `thread_id` to `ChatMessageCreator`,
which will be used when replying to a message that is already part of
a thread, and we validate whether that `thread_id` is okay in the context
of the channel and also the reply chain.
This work is always done, regardless of channel `thread_enabled` settings
or the `enable_experimental_chat_threaded_discussions` site setting.
This commit does not include a large data migration to backfill threads for
all existing reply chains, its unnecessary to do this so early in the project,
we can do this later if necessary.
This commit also includes thread considerations in the `MessageMover` class:
* If the original message and N other messages of a thread is moved,
the remaining messages in the thread have a new thread created in
the old channel and are moved to it.
* The reply chain is not preserved for moved messages, so new threads are
not created in the destination channel.
In addition to this, I added a fix to also clear the `in_reply_to_id` of messages
in the old channel which are moved out of that channel for data cleanliness.
UI is not modified much besides removing the border-bottom, and using only message body.
However instead of having a fix template, this is all automatically generated and random, resulting in a more natural experience.
Only the header's height and 15px spacing are removed from the height of the viewport.
Previously it was limited to 90vh and there was also a useless property on a child node limiting it to 85vh. We now use only one property.
This PR is a major change to Sass compilation in Discourse.
The new version of sass-ruby moves to dart-sass putting we back on the supported version of Sass. It does so while keeping compatibility with the existing method signatures, so minimal change is needed in Discourse for this change.
This moves us
From:
- sassc 2.0.1 (Feb 2019)
- libsass 3.5.2 (May 2018)
To:
- dart-sass 1.58
This update applies the following breaking changes:
>
> These breaking changes are coming soon or have recently been released:
>
> [Functions are stricter about which units they allow](https://sass-lang.com/documentation/breaking-changes/function-units) beginning in Dart Sass 1.32.0.
>
> [Selectors with invalid combinators are invalid](https://sass-lang.com/documentation/breaking-changes/bogus-combinators) beginning in Dart Sass 1.54.0.
>
> [/ is changing from a division operation to a list separator](https://sass-lang.com/documentation/breaking-changes/slash-div) beginning in Dart Sass 1.33.0.
>
> [Parsing the special syntax of @-moz-document will be invalid](https://sass-lang.com/documentation/breaking-changes/moz-document) beginning in Dart Sass 1.7.2.
>
> [Compound selectors could not be extended](https://sass-lang.com/documentation/breaking-changes/extend-compound) in Dart Sass 1.0.0 and Ruby Sass 4.0.0.
SCSS files have been migrated automatically using `sass-migrator division app/assets/stylesheets/**/*.scss`
Prior to this fix on mobile the card-cloak would not get removed if the user/group card was leading to a non existing user/group.
The fix ensures hidden class is removed each time we call show.
Public channels were previously sorted by name, however, channels with a leading emoji in the name would always appear first in the list. By using slug we avoid this issue.
We recently had a bug which caused auto-bumping to "not work". The problem was that the value had been set to 0.5, which when coerced to an integer turned into 0. So the feature is "working as intended", but there's a possibility of misconfiguration.
When looking into this, I noticed that the inputs on the category settings page doesn't have any particular sanitisation in the front-end, and also one or two validations missing in the back-end.
This change:
- Takes an existing component, NumberField and enhances that by only allowing numeric input, essentially turning it into a managed input using the same approach as our PasswordField.
- Changes the numeric inputs on category settings page to use this component.
- Adds appropriate min constraints to the fields to disallow out-of-range values.
- Adds missing back-end validations to relevant fields.
Triggers a DiscourseEvent when a message is deleted, similar to
`:chat_message_created` and `:chat_message_edited`. This is not used
in this plugin, but can be used by other plugins to act when a message
is trashed.
* FIX: Remove action buttons if post has already been reviewed
* Change the approve to reject test to expect an error
* Adds a controller spec to ensure you can't edit a non-pending review item
* Remove unnessary conditional
When a CUSTOM_SCHEME is missing a color (e.g. 'Dracula' is missing a 'highlight' color), we need to fallback to `ColorScheme.base_colors`. This regressed in 66256c15bd
This commits adds the ability to add a header to the embedded comments
view. One use case for this is to allow `postMessage` communication
between the comments iframe and the parent frame, for example, when
toggling the theme of the parent webpage.
We caught it in logs, race condition led to this error:
ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique
(PG::UniqueViolation: ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "user_statuses_pkey"
DETAIL: Key (user_id)=(15) already exists.)
The reason the problem happened was that we were checking if a user has status and if not inserting status:
if user_status
...
else
self.user_status = UserStatus.create!(status)
end
The problem is that it's possible that another request will insert status just after we check if status exists and just before our request call `UserStatus.create!(status)`. Using `upsert` fixes the problem because under the hood `upsert` generates the only SQL request that uses "INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE". So we do everything in one SQL query, and that query takes care of resolving possible conflicts.
This is an alternative way to use `RenderGlimmer` which can be more ergonomic for iterative updates of a codebase. For documentation, see `widgets/render-glimmer.js`
