When `SiteSetting.review_every_post` is true and the category `require_topic_approval` system creates two reviewable items.
1. Firstly, because the category needs approval, the `ReviewableQueuePost` record` is created - at this stage, no topic is created.
2. Admin is approving the review. The topic and first post are created.
3. Because `review_every_post` is true `queue_for_review_if_possible` callback is evaluated and `ReviewablePost` is created.
4. Then `ReviewableQueuePost` is linked to the newly generated topic and post.
At the beginning, we were thinking about hooking to those guards:
```
def self.queue_for_review_if_possible(post, created_or_edited_by)
return unless SiteSetting.review_every_post
return if post.post_type != Post.types[:regular] || post.topic.private_message?
return if Reviewable.pending.where(target: post).exists?
...
```
And add something like
```
return if Reviewable.approved.where(target: post).exists?
```
However, because the callback happens in point 3. before the `ReviewableQueuePost` is linked to the `Topic`, it was not possible.
Therefore, when `ReviewableQueuePost` is creating a `Topic`, a new option called `:reviewed_queued_post` is passed to `PostCreator` to avoid creating a second `Reviewable`.
Whenever one creates, updates, or deletes a post, we should keep the `topic.word_count` counter in sync.
Context - https://meta.discourse.org/t/-/308062
We never use that information and this also fixes an issue with the BCC plugin which ends up triggering a rate-limit because we were publishing a "NEW_PRIVATE_MESSAGE" to the user sending the BCC for every recipients 💥
Internal - t/118283
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_tag_topics site setting to tag_topic_allowed_groups.
We have all these calls to Group.refresh_automatic_groups! littered throughout the tests. Including tests that are seemingly unrelated to groups. This is because automatic group memberships aren't fabricated when making a vanilla user. There are two places where you'd want to use this:
You have fabricated a user that needs a certain trust level (which is now based on group membership.)
You need the system user to have a certain trust level.
In the first case, we can pass refresh_auto_groups: true to the fabricator instead. This is a more lightweight operation that only considers a single user, instead of all users in all groups.
The second case is no longer a thing after #25400.
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_tag_topics site setting to tag_topic_allowed_groups.
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_create_tag site setting to create_tag_allowed_groups.
This PR maintains backwards compatibility until we can update plugins and themes using this.
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
Applies the embed_unlisted site setting consistently across topic embeds, including those created via the WP Discourse plugin. Relatedly, adds a embed exception to can_create_unlisted_topic? check. Users creating embedded topics are not always staff.
The most common thing that we do with fab! is:
fab!(:thing) { Fabricate(:thing) }
This commit adds a shorthand for this which is just simply:
fab!(:thing)
i.e. If you omit the block, then, by default, you'll get a `Fabricate`d object using the fabricator of the same name.
* FIX: Secure upload post processing race condition
This commit fixes a couple of issues.
A little background -- when uploads are created in the composer
for posts, regardless of whether the upload will eventually be
marked secure or not, if secure_uploads is enabled we always mark
the upload secure at first. This is so the upload is by default
protected, regardless of post type (regular or PM) or category.
This was causing issues in some rare occasions though because
of the order of operations of our post creation and processing
pipeline. When creating a post, we enqueue a sidekiq job to
post-process the post which does various things including
converting images to lightboxes. We were also enqueuing a job
to update the secure status for all uploads in that post.
Sometimes the secure status job would run before the post process
job, marking uploads as _not secure_ in the background and changing
their ACL before the post processor ran, which meant the users
would see a broken image in their posts. This commit fixes that issue
by always running the upload security changes inline _within_ the
cooked_post_processor job.
The other issue was that the lightbox wrapper link for images in
the post would end up with a URL like this:
```
href="/secure-uploads/original/2X/4/4e1f00a40b6c952198bbdacae383ba77932fc542.jpeg"
```
Since we weren't actually using the `upload.url` to pass to
`UrlHelper.cook_url` here, we weren't converting this href to the CDN
URL if the post was not in a secure context (the UrlHelper does not
know how to convert a secure-uploads URL to a CDN one). Now we
always end up with the correct lightbox href. This was less of an issue
than the other one, since the secure-uploads URL works even when the
upload has become non-secure, but it was a good inconsistency to fix
anyway.
Why this change?
The `PostsController#create` action allows arbitrary topic custom fields
to be set by any user that can create a topic. Without any restrictions,
this opens us up to potential security issues where plugins may be using
topic custom fields in security sensitive areas.
What does this change do?
1. This change introduces the `register_editable_topic_custom_field` plugin
API which allows plugins to register topic custom fields that are
editable either by staff users only or all users. The registered
editable topic custom fields are stored in `DiscoursePluginRegistry` and
is called by a new method `Topic#editable_custom_fields` which is then
used in the `PostsController#create` controller action. When an unpermitted custom fields is present in the `meta_data` params,
a 400 response code is returned.
2. Removes all reference to `meta_data` on a topic as it is confusing
since we actually mean topic custom fields instead.
* FIX: min_personal_message_post_length not applying to first post
Due to the way PostCreator is wired, we were not applying min_personal_message_post_length
to the first post.
This meant that admins could not configure it so PMs have different
limits.
The code was already pretending that this works, but had no reliable way
of figuring out if we were dealing with a private message
* DEV: Remove enable_whispers site setting
Whispers are enabled as long as there is at least one group allowed to
whisper, see whispers_allowed_groups site setting.
* DEV: Always enable whispers for admins if at least one group is allowed.
Update failing spec which previously used non-staff user to create
hidden posts.
Also add new spec for non-staff use cases to prevent future
regressions.
This will be used by plugins to handle the client side of their custom
post validations without having to overwrite the whole composer save
action as it was done in other plugins.
Co-authored-by: Penar Musaraj <pmusaraj@gmail.com>
cf. e62e93f83a
This PR also makes it so `bot` (negative ID) and `system` users are always allowed
to send PMs, since the old conditional was just based on `enable_personal_messages`
This commit renames all secure_media related settings to secure_uploads_* along with the associated functionality.
This is being done because "media" does not really cover it, we aren't just doing this for images and videos etc. but for all uploads in the site.
Additionally, in future we want to secure more types of uploads, and enable a kind of "mixed mode" where some uploads are secure and some are not, so keeping media in the name is just confusing.
This also keeps compatibility with the `secure-media-uploads` path, and changes new
secure URLs to be `secure-uploads`.
Deprecated settings:
* secure_media -> secure_uploads
* secure_media_allow_embed_images_in_emails -> secure_uploads_allow_embed_images_in_emails
* secure_media_max_email_embed_image_size_kb -> secure_uploads_max_email_embed_image_size_kb
Topic allowed user records were created for small actions, which lead to
the system user being invited in many private topics when the user
removed themselves or if a group was invited but some members already
had access.
This commits skips creating topic allowed user. They are already skipped
for the whisper posts.
Updates automatically data on the stats section of the topic.
It will update automatically the following information: likes, replies and last reply (timestamp and user)
This reverts commit 94c3bbc2d1.
At this current point in time, we do not have enough data on whether
this centralisation is the trade-offs of coupling features into a single
channel.
This commit migrates all bookmarks to be polymorphic (using the
bookmarkable_id and bookmarkable_type) columns. It also deletes
all the old code guarded behind the use_polymorphic_bookmarks setting
and changes that setting to true for all sites and by default for
the sake of plugins.
No data is deleted in the migrations, the old post_id and for_topic
columns for bookmarks will be dropped later on.
This commit fixes two issues at play. The first was introduced
in f6c852b (or maybe not introduced
but rather revealed). When a user posted a new message in a topic,
they received the unread topic tracking state MessageBus message,
and the Unread (X) indicator was incremented by one, because with the
aforementioned perf commit we "guess" the correct last read post
for the user, because we no longer calculate individual users' read
status there. This meant that every time a user posted in a topic
they tracked, the unread indicator was incremented. To get around
this, we can just exclude the user who created the post from the
target users of the unread state message.
The second issue was related to the private message topic tracking
state, and was somewhat similar. Whenever a user created a new private
message, the New (X) indicator was incremented, and could not be
cleared until the page was refreshed. To solve this, we just don't
update the topic state for the user when the new_topic tracking state
message comes through if the user who created the topic is the
same as the current user.
cf. https://meta.discourse.org/t/bottom-of-topic-shows-there-is-1-unread-remaining-when-there-are-actually-0-unread-topics-remaining/220817
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.
Previously we were publishing one messagebus message per user which was 'tracking' a topic. On large sites, this can easily be 1000+ messages. The important information in the message is common between all users, so we can manage with a single message on a shared channel, which will be much more efficient.
For user-specific values (notification_level and last_read_post_number), the JS app can infer values which are 'good enough'. Correct values will be loaded as soon as a topic-list containing the topic is visited.
