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_allow_user_card_background site setting to user_card_background_allowed_groups.
Nothing of note here. This is used in exactly one place, and there's no fallout.
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 tl4_delete_posts_and_topics site setting to delete_all_posts_and_topics_allowed_groups.
This one is a bit different from previous ones, as it's a boolean flag, and the default should be no group. Pay special attention to the migration during review.
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_to_flag_posts site setting to flag_post_allowed_groups.
Note: In the original setting, "posts" is plural. I have changed this to "post" singular in the new setting to match others.
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_to_edit_post site setting to edit_post_allowed_groups.
The old implementation will co-exist for a short period while I update any references in plugins and themes.
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
This change converts the allow_uploaded_avatars site setting to uploaded_avatars_allowed_groups.
See: https://meta.discourse.org/t/283408
Hides the old setting
Adds the new site setting
Adds 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 allow_uploaded_avatars setting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/117248
This change converts the min_trust_to_edit_wiki_post site setting to edit_wiki_post_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 email_in_min_trust setting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/117248
Admin can add tag description up to 1000 characters.
Full description is displayed on tag page, however on topic list it is truncated to 80 characters.
* DEV: Auto link video placeholder posts
Followup to 91232847e3
Adds a migration to auto-link any video placeholder posts so that upload
references will be created.
Co-authored-by: Jarek Radosz <jradosz@gmail.com>
We were seeing lots of deadlocks deploying this migration. This improves
the situation in 2 ways.
1. ddl transaction is avoided, so we hold locks for far shorter times
2. we operate in chunks of a maximum of 100_000 posts (though it is heavily filtered down)
* improve code so it is clearer
This change converts the `email_in_min_trust` site setting to
`email_in_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
`email_in_min_trust` setting entirely.
Internal ref: /t/115696
* 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
This commit fixes an issue where when some actions were done
(deleting/recovering post, moving posts) we updated the
topic_users.bookmarked column to the wrong value. This was happening
because the SyncTopicUserBookmarked job was not taking into account
Topic level bookmarks, so if there was a Topic bookmark and no
Post bookmarks for a user in the topic, they would have
topic_users.bookmarked set to false, which meant the bookmark would
no longer show in the /bookmarks list.
To reproduce before the fix:
* Bookmark a topic and don’t bookmark any posts within
* Delete or recover any post in the topic
c.f. https://meta.discourse.org/t/disappearing-bookmarks-and-expected-behavior-of-bookmarks/264670/36
This commit introduces a new feature that allows theme developers to manage the transformation of theme settings over time. Similar to Rails migrations, the theme settings migration system enables developers to write and execute migrations for theme settings, ensuring a smooth transition when changes are required in the format or structure of setting values.
Example use cases for the theme settings migration system:
1. Renaming a theme setting.
2. Changing the data type of a theme setting (e.g., transforming a string setting containing comma-separated values into a proper list setting).
3. Altering the format of data stored in a theme setting.
All of these use cases and more are now possible while preserving theme setting values for sites that have already modified their theme settings.
Usage:
1. Create a top-level directory called `migrations` in your theme/component, and then within the `migrations` directory create another directory called `settings`.
2. Inside the `migrations/settings` directory, create a JavaScript file using the format `XXXX-some-name.js`, where `XXXX` is a unique 4-digit number, and `some-name` is a descriptor of your choice that describes the migration.
3. Within the JavaScript file, define and export (as the default) a function called `migrate`. This function will receive a `Map` object and must also return a `Map` object (it's acceptable to return the same `Map` object that the function received).
4. The `Map` object received by the `migrate` function will include settings that have been overridden or changed by site administrators. Settings that have never been changed from the default will not be included.
5. The keys and values contained in the `Map` object that the `migrate` function returns will replace all the currently changed settings of the theme.
6. Migrations are executed in numerical order based on the XXXX segment in the migration filenames. For instance, `0001-some-migration.js` will be executed before `0002-another-migration.js`.
Here's a complete example migration script that renames a setting from `setting_with_old_name` to `setting_with_new_name`:
```js
// File name: 0001-rename-setting.js
export default function migrate(settings) {
if (settings.has("setting_with_old_name")) {
settings.set("setting_with_new_name", settings.get("setting_with_old_name"));
}
return settings;
}
```
Internal topic: t/109980
No plugins or themes rely on anonymous_posting_min_trust_level so we
can just switch straight over to anonymous_posting_allowed_groups
This also adds an AUTO_GROUPS const which can be imported in JS
tests which is analogous to the one defined in group.rb. This can be used
to set the current user's groups where JS tests call for checking these groups
against site settings.
Finally a AtLeastOneGroupValidator validator is added for group_list site
settings which ensures that at least one group is always selected, since if
you want to allow all users to use a feature in this way you can just use
the everyone group.
Why this change?
Back in May 17 2023 along with the release of Discourse 3.1, we announced
on meta that the legacy hamburger dropdown navigation menu is
deprecated and will be dropped in Discourse 3.2. This is the link to the announcement
on meta: https://meta.discourse.org/t/removing-the-legacy-hamburger-navigation-menu-option/265274
## What does this change do?
This change removes the `legacy` option from the `navigation_menu` site
setting and migrates existing sites on the `legacy` option to the
`header dropdown` option.
All references to the `legacy` option in code and tests have been
removed as well.
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.
What motivated this change?
A core migration contains chat related code and this should not be the
case since chat related migration code should live in the chat plugin.
What does this change do?
This change removes the migration which was introduced to keep existing
sites on the legacy navigation menu as well as keep chat disabled when
the defaults for the `navigation_menu` and `chat_enabled` site settings
were flipped. Since this migration doesn't apply to new sites and
the migration has already been introduced for 9 months, it is safe for
us to remove it.
We have one site setting, `auto_silence_fast_typers_max_trust_level`, which expects a trust level. However, the type is set to integer, which makes it very hard for a layman to enter the correct thing.
This PR changes the type of the site setting to the `TrustLevelSetting` enum.
The use of these are interchangeable in the back-end, since `SiteSetting.auto_silence_fast_typers_max_trust_level` still returns the integer value with the enum.
In a previous commit these site settings were removed from the codebase
because they were identified as unused settings. This commit removes
these settings from the db in case they existed in the site settings
table.
Follow up to: da389d7844
This migration that populates category setting data from custom fields did not account for the fact that custom fields that expect an integer can still be an empty string. An empty string can't be inserted into the new integer type column.
If the setting is an empty string, cast it to NULL.
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 num_auto_bump_daily from custom fields to the new CategorySetting model.
In addition it sets the default value to 0, which exhibits the same behaviour as when the value is NULL.
We currently are accumulating orphaned upload references whenever drafts are deleted.
This change deals with future cases by adding a dependent strategy of delete_all on the Draft#upload_references association. (We don't really need destroy strategy here, since UploadReference is a simple data bag and there are no validations or callbacks on the model.)
It deals with existing cases through a migration that deletes all existing, orphaned draft upload references.
Why this change?
In `PostDestroyer#make_previous_post_the_last_one` and
`Topic.reset_highest`, we have a query that looks something like this:
```
SELECT user_id FROM posts
WHERE topic_id = :topic_id AND
deleted_at IS NULL AND
post_type <> 4
#{post_type}
ORDER BY created_at desc
LIMIT 1
```
However, we currently don't have an index that caters directly to this
query. As a result, we have seen this query performing poorly on large
sites if the PG planner ends up using an index that is suboptimal for
the query.
This commit adds an index to the `posts` table on `topic_id` and then
`created_at`. For the query above, PG will be able to do a backwards
index scan efficiently.
After deleting SiteSetting::ALLOWLIST_DEPRECATED_SITE_SETTINGS, we found out this was referenced in a migration file. This PR inlines the constant into the migration file to prevent it from erroring out.
Performing a `Delete User`/`Delete and Block User` reviewable actions for a
queued post reviewable from the `review.show` route results in an error
popup even if the action completes successfully.
This happens because unlike other reviewable types, a user delete action
on a queued post reviewable results in the deletion of the reviewable
itself. A subsequent attempt to reload the reviewable record results in
404. The deletion happens as part of the call to `UserDestroyer` which
includes a step for destroying reviewables created by the user being
destroyed. At the root of this is the creator of the queued post
being set as the creator of the reviewable as instead of the system
user.
This change assigns the creator of the reviewable to the system user and
uses the more approapriate `target_created_by` column for the creator of the
post being queued.
Simplified query based on SiteSettings to join only relevant user_options rows.
In addition, index was added to 'watched_precedence_over_muted` column in `user_options` table to speed up query
This PR adds a feature to help admins stay up-to-date with their translations. We already have protections preventing admins from problems when they update their overrides. This change adds some protection in the other direction (where translations change in core due to an upgrade) by creating a notice for admins when defaults have changed.
Terms:
- In the case where Discourse core changes the default translation, the translation override is considered "outdated".
- In the case above where interpolation keys were changed from the ones the override is using, it is considered "invalid".
- If none of the above applies, the override is considered "up to date".
How does it work?
There are a few pieces that makes this work:
- When an admin creates or updates a translation override, we store the original translation at the time of write. (This is used to detect changes later on.)
- There is a background job that runs once every day and checks for outdated and invalid overrides, and marks them as such.
- When there are any outdated or invalid overrides, a notice is shown in admin dashboard with a link to the text customization page.
Known limitations
The link from the dashboard links to the default locale text customization page. Given there might be invalid overrides in multiple languages, I'm not sure what we could do here. Consideration for future improvement.
Recently, site setting watched_precedence_over_muted was introduced - https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/22252
In this PR, we are allowing users to override it. The option is only displayed when the user has watched categories and muted tags, or vice versa.
Why this change?
We are currently not fully satisfied with the current way to edit the
categories and tags that appears in the sidebar where the user is
redirected to the tracking preferences tab in the user's profile causing
the user to lose context of the current page. In addition, the dropdown
to select categories or tags limits the amount of information we can
display.
Since editing or adding a custom categories section is already using a
modal, we have decided to switch editing the categories and tags that
appear in the sidebar to use a modal as well.
This commit removes the `new_edit_sidebar_categories_tags_interface_groups` site setting and
make the modals the default for all users.
