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.
This was failing quite often with the following error:
```
1) Emoji deny list when using composer should remove denied emojis from emoji picker
Failure/Error: find("#{COMPOSER_ID} .emoji-picker")
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find css "#reply-control .emoji-picker"
```
This was because our `click_toolbar_button` call on the Composer
page object used a number for the position of the toolbar button,
which can be flaky since there are things that hide/show toolbar
buttons or change their position.
Each toolbar button in the composer has a CSS class, so it is
more reliable to use that instead. Also fixed an instance of
calling `has_X?` method directly instead of using the
`have_x` rspec matcher.
Responding to negative behaviour tends to solicit more of the same. Common wisdom states: "don't feed the trolls".
This change codifies that advice by introducing a new nudge when hitting the reply button on a flagged post. It will be shown if either the current user, or two other users (configurable via a site setting) have flagged the post.
This feature will allow sites to define which emoji are not allowed. Emoji in this list should be excluded from the set we show in the core emoji picker used in the composer for posts when emoji are enabled. And they should not be allowed to be chosen to be added to messages or as reactions in chat.
This feature prevents denied emoji from appearing in the following scenarios:
- topic title and page title
- private messages (topic title and body)
- inserting emojis into a chat
- reacting to chat messages
- using the emoji picker (composer, user status etc)
- using search within emoji picker
It also takes into account the various ways that emojis can be accessed, such as:
- emoji autocomplete suggestions
- emoji favourites (auto populates when adding to emoji deny list for example)
- emoji inline translations
- emoji skintones (ie. for certain hand gestures)
The latter can be called directly from the Topic page object,
so we can remove some duplication between the two. There are
levels of page objects (e.g. entire page, component, complete flow)
and its perfectly valid to call one from another.
Keegan George
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
Martin Brennan
Ted Johansson
David Battersby
Natalie Tay