If enabled, this will fire a webhook whenever a user's notification has
been created. This could potentially be a lot of data depending on your
forum, and should be used carefully since it includes everything all users
will see in their feeds.
This adds support for a `<d-topics-list>` tag you can embed in your site
that will be rendered as a list of discourse topics. Any attributes on
the tag will be passed as filters. For example:
`<d-topics-list discourse-url="URL" category="1234">` will filter to category 1234.
To use this feature, enable the `embed topics list` site setting. Then
on the site you want to embed, include the following javascript:
`<script
src="http://URL/javascripts/embed-topics.js"></script>`
Where `URL` is your discourse forum's URL.
Then include the `<d-topics-list discourse-url="URL">` tag in your HTML document and it will
be replaced with the list of topics.
There are situations where depending on site settings, actions could be
taken due to flags (for example, hiding a post) but those actions were
not visibile in the review queue due to visibility settings.
This patch makes sure that the minimum score required for an action such
as hiding a post needs to meet the visibility for a moderator to see it.
This happened because the modal controller was not clearing the `name`
attribute, which is used for looking up the controller to call `onClose`
on.
Every page navigation would call the method over and over, breaking
state in odd ways.
* UX: Rename "Keep Post" to "Keep Post Hidden" when hidden
This is based on this feedback:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/category-group-review-moderation/116478/19
When a post is hidden this makes the operation much more clear.
* REFACTOR: Better support for aliases for actions
Allow calls on alias actions and delegate to the original one.
This is less code but also simplifies tests where the action might
be "agree_and_keep" or "agree_and_keep_hidden" which are the same.
If a post arrives via email but must be reviewed, we now show an
icon that can be clicked to view the raw contents of the email.
This is useful if Discourse's email parser is acting odd and the user
reviewing the post wants to know what the original contents were before
approving/rejecting the post.
* FEATURE: Allow choice of category when making a PM public
Previously it would default to uncategorized, which was not ideal on
some forums. This gives the staff member more choice about what they'd
like to do.
* Make the optional category more explicit
* Joffrey's feedback
This is a low severity security fix because it requires a logged in
admin user to update a site setting via the API directly to an invalid
value.
The fix adds validation for the affected site settings, as well as a
secondary fix to prevent injection in the event of bad data somehow
already exists.
There is a security hole in lodash with prototype pollution. It's not
clear if Discourse is affected but to be on the safe side we will
upgrade right away.
Note that the front end Discourse does not appear to use `defaultsDeep`
in our custom build and should be protected.
Note this is very low severity as the group needs to be created with a
default title that contains HTML, and group creation is restricted to
staff members right now.
If a database exception is raised ActiveRecord will always rollback
even if caught.
Instead we build the query in manual SQL and DO NOTHING when there's a
conflict. If we detect nothing was done, perform an update.
See related topic:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/back-button-history-not-properly-working/122183
The issue here is the transition was not completing properly which meant
if you backed out of a topic quickly and entered a new one, hitting back
in the second topic would sometimes take you to the previous one instead
of back to the topic list.
To reproduce:
1. Visit a url in a new tab such as `/latest?order=views`
2. Click a topic link
3. Click the back button
Before this patch, you would not be sent back to the latest list.
Now, I am somewhat hesitant to delete code like this, but the [original
commit](https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/b2b7f4d90592a70a32c748130f0f82a732cd3090)
explains a situation that I cannot reproduce with the code missing.
I cannot seem to keep the filters as sticky even if I try. At the very
least this is better to commit right now than the currently known broken
situation.
This is a problem that has long plagued Discourse. The root issue here
is that we have to implement our own link click handler, because
Discourse allows users to create HTML blobs of content with links, and
when those links are clicked they must be handled by the Ember router.
This always involved a certain amount of use of private Ember APIs which
of course evolved over time.
The API has more or less stabilized in the last two years, however we
have hacks in our URLs to handle a dynamic root path, depending on how
forums have set up their filters and in what order.
This patch adds a special case for the root path so we needn't update
the URL ourselves otherwise, which preserves the back button on index
routes. The update call would otherwise insert an extra history event if
a route redirected on transition, breaking the back button.
* Calling `Discourse.reset()` creates a new container
We should run our de-initializers only after acceptance tests,
since initializers are not run outside of acceptance tests anyway,
and the container at this point can be passed properly to the
`teardown()` method.
* Remove `Discourse.reset` from tests
This would cause a new container to be created which leaks many objects.
* `updateCurrentUser` is more accurate than `replaceCurrentUser`
It was expecting a method to remove the reviewable from the current
list, only we were not displaying a list.
Instead, we refresh the reviewable model with the latest result.
* Remove long-deprecated method
* FIX: Memory Leaks when decorating posts
Previously we'd keep creating mixins dynamically when decorating the
same class.
This code changes the API to recommend an `id` parameter for each
decorator which will avoid leaks. All plugins should be updated to
include this parameter, although if they don't in the meantime it'll
just mean a warning in the console (and a continued leak.)
We now show if a queued or flagged post is a reply to another when in
the review queue. It's especially helpful for queued posts where
normally they are linked to the topic where they are created, and you
have no context about the reply.
Note that this will only apply to new queued posts going forward.
Previously queued posts will not show the "in reply to"
This was a fairly serious regression on sites with large (mega) topics,
however it was limited to staff.
The issue here is the query was using filtered_post_ids which I'd
assumed was already windowed to the current page, when in fact it was
all the ids in the topic. This fix corrects it by using the correct
windowed collection.
The `AutoQueueHandler` will ignore really old flags. In that case, don't
notify the user that the moderator is looking into it. They probably
never saw it because it didn't meet the reviewable minimum priority.
We noticed this with the house ads plugin. It inserted content after a
post, which was not taken into account when calculating and memoizing
the height of the element.
Co-authored-by: nlalonde
Co-authored-by: pmusaraj
This is a feature that used to be present in discourse-assign but is
much easier to implement in core. It also allows a topic to be assigned
without it claiming for review and vice versa and allows it to work with
category group reviewers.
We found score hard to understand. It is still there behind the scenes
for sorting purposes, but it is no longer shown.
You can now filter by minimum priority (low, med, high) instead of
score.
This change shows a notification number besides the flag icon in the
post menu if there is reviewable content associated with the post.
Additionally, if there is pending stuff to review, the icon has a red
background.
We have also removed the list of links below a post with the flag
status. A reviewer is meant to click the number beside the flag icon to
view the flags. As a consequence of losing those links, we've removed
the ability to undo or ignore flags below a post.
Robin Ward
