* Use QUnit `module` instead of `discourseModule`
* Use QUnit `test` instead of `componentTest`
* Use angle-bracket syntax
* Remove jQuery usage
* Improve assertions (and actually fix some of them)
It used to validate the post from the perspective of the user who
created the post. That did not work well when an admin attempted to
add a poll to a post created by a user who cannot create posts because
it said the user cannot create polls.
The problem was that it used post.user for the validation process
instead of post.acting_user.
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.
This allows text editors to use correct syntax coloring for the heredoc sections.
Heredoc tag names we use:
languages: SQL, JS, RUBY, LUA, HTML, CSS, SCSS, SH, HBS, XML, YAML/YML, MF, ICS
other: MD, TEXT/TXT, RAW, EMAIL
Multiple polls can be created without the min attribute but that means
the attribute defaults to 1. A default of 0 does not make any sense
because it is equivalent to saying that a user is not casting any votes.
Skipping methods we don't use gives us mem/perf gains (minuscule but still), but more importantly fixes warnings about `Poll#open` (created by `enum :status`) conflicting with some internal AR method. 😃
`poll` plugin was publishing on `/polls/[topic_id]` every time a non-first post was created. I can't imagine this being needed. It regressed 3 years ago in https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/6359
* DEV: Remove spec that we no longer need.
As far as we know, the migration has been successful for a number of
years.
* FIX: Validate number of votes allowed per poll per user.
They can use the remove vote button or select the same option again for
single choice polls.
This commit refactor the plugin to properly organize code and make it
easier to follow.
Allows creating a bookmark with the `for_topic` flag introduced in d1d2298a4c set to true. This happens when clicking on the Bookmark button in the topic footer when no other posts are bookmarked. In a later PR, when clicking on these topic-level bookmarks the user will be taken to the last unread post in the topic, not the OP. Only the OP can have a topic level bookmark, and users can also make a post-level bookmark on the OP of the topic.
I had to do some pretty heavy refactors because most of the bookmark code in the JS topics controller was centred around instances of Post JS models, but the topic level bookmark is not centred around a post. Some refactors were just for readability as well.
Also removes some missed reminderType code from the purge in 41e19adb0d
This adds a new property, `pluginId` which you can pass to `modifyClass`
which prevent the class from being modified over and over again.
This also includes a fix for polls which was leaking state between tests
which this new functionality exposed.
User flair was given by user's primary group. This PR separates the
two, adds a new field to the user model for flair group ID and users
can select their flair from user preferences now.
In some conditions, pages were skipped. This was implemented in the past
in f490a8d, but then reverted in 04ec543, because sometimes it was stuck
reloading the first page.
The code that loads more results was simplified and a lot of duplicate
code was removed. The logic to remove users who changed their vote was
also introduced again, but just for the regular polls.
The endpoint the existence of the poll and if the current user can see it. It
will facilitate using a poll programmatically, especially if we'd like to create an external poll through a theme component.
Partially revert f490a8d39a because we aren't able to
load more than the initially preloaded voters.
We were always trying to load the 1st page of voters.
Also removed the "remove users who changed their vote" logic as it was not properly working in multiple choices polls.
cc @nbianca
When initially released, the polls had a different design that didn't interact
well with the quote button - https://meta.discourse.org/t/31586
Now that the design has evolved, not being able to select text from inside a poll is
counter productive, so it's enabled again.
* FIX: Fetch last page again if incomplete
The next fetched page number used to increase continuously even if the
last page was incomplete and fetching it again could have new voters.
* FIX: Do not display twice a user who changed vote
A user could appear under two voting options when they changed their
vote because pressing the Load More Voters button updated only the
current option.
The warning was:
DEPRECATION WARNING: Calling `<<` to an ActiveModel::Errors message array in order to add an error is deprecated. Please call `ActiveModel::Errors#add` instead. (called from block (3 levels) in activate! at discourse/plugins/poll/plugin.rb:519)
In some very rare cases, poll options can end up with images that have
no dimensions, in which case, navigating to replies in that post stream
might result in unexpected scrolling (as the browser loads the images
and adjusts its layout).
This ensures that if width/height attributes are missing from an image,
the image is forced to display within a 200 by 200 pixels space.
Co-authored-by: David Taylor <david@taylorhq.com>
Some plugins hook into Post after save to set custom fields and save again.
For example: https://github.com/discourse/discourse-category-experts/blob/main/lib/category_experts/post_handler.rb#L27
Problem is that in case like that `raw_changed?` is false but all callback are triggered. `extracted_polls` is class atribute therefore that should be reset with each attempt.
That was causing an error:
```
#<ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique: PG::UniqueViolation: ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint
"index_polls_on_post_id_and_name" DETAIL: Key (post_id, name)=(8967, poll) already exists.
```
Over the years we accrued many spelling mistakes in the code base.
This PR attempts to fix spelling mistakes and typos in all areas of the code that are extremely safe to change
- comments
- test descriptions
- other low risk areas