What is the problem?
The `ReviewablePerformResultSerializer` includes `transition_to` and
`transition_to_id` attributes in API responses, but these values are
not consumed by any frontend code. The frontend only uses
`remove_reviewable_ids`, `reviewable_count`, `unseen_reviewable_count`,
and `completed_message` from the perform result.
What is the solution?
Remove the unused `transition_to` and `transition_to_id` attributes
from `ReviewablePerformResultSerializer`, along with the
`transition_to_id` method. Update corresponding test expectations.
With reviewables now being able to have multiple actions performed on
them, we don't want to update the final reviewable state until an action
from every action bundle has been performed.
This change makes use of the new `ReviewableActionLog`, logging actions
when they occur, then checking to see if a reviewable has had all
actions performed before finalising it.
As part of the review queue refresh, we'll be adding the ability for moderators to make notes on individual reviewable items. As a first step, this change adds the new model and associated backend code.
When multiple admins are working in the review queue, it's quite easy for two people to try and handle the same reviewable at the same time. This change addresses the two major situations where this can occur.
The `ReviewableClaimedTopic` model has been extended to allow the system to mark a reviewable as claimed as soon as the first moderator starts handling the reviewable, even when the `reviewable_claiming` setting is disabled. This ensures that reviewable actions with client-site activity (for example, `agree_and_suspend`) will lock the reviewable before another moderator starts working on it.
When someone handles handles a reviewable, we now use `MessageBus` to inform other moderators that it's changed. If any of the other moderator have that reviewable open (either individually, or on the list screen), it will automatically refresh that data.
This change adds a new `type_source` field to the `Reviewable` model, indicating whether the Reviewable type was registered by `core`, a plugin, or an `unknown` source.
When a plugin that registered a Reviewable type is disabled, this allows us to tell the user which plugin they need to re-enable to handle any orphan reviewable items.
Plugins like for example AI or Akismet create reviewable items. When the
plugin is disabled, then we cannot properly handle those items.
In that situation, we should display warnings about unhandled types.
Instruct admin to reenable plugins. In addition, we should allow the
admin to delete all pending reviews from disabled plugins.
Followup c7e471d35a
It is currently possible to add a bundle (which is a collection
of actions used for a dropdown on the client) for a reviewable
via actions.add_bundle and then never add any actions to it.
This causes the client to explode, as seen in the referenced
commit, because of the way our store expects to resolve objects
referenced by ID that are passed down by the serializer, which
then causes Ember to have an unrecoverable render error.
Fixing this on the serializer level is not really possible because
of all the ActiveModel::Serializer magic that serializes
objects by ID reference when doing things like has_many.
`Reviewable#actions_for` is a better place to do this anyway,
because this is the main location where the bundles and actions
are built for every action via the serializer.
Currently, categories support designating only 1 group as a moderation group on the category. This commit removes the one group limitation and makes it possible to designate multiple groups as mods on a category.
Internal topic: t/124648.
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_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.
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.
* UX: add type tag and design update
* UX: clarify status copy in reviewQ
* DEV: switch to selectKit
* UX: color approve/reject buttons in RQ
* DEV: regroup actions
* UX: add type tag and design update
* UX: clarify status copy in reviewQ
* Join questions for flagged post with "or" with new I18n function
* Move ReviewableScores component out of context
* Add CSS classes to reviewable-item based on human type
* UX: add table header for scoring
* UX: don't display % score
* UX: prefix modifier class with dash
* UX: reviewQ flag table styling
* UX: consistent use of ignore icon
* DEV: only show context question on pending status
* UX: only show table headers on pending status
* DEV: reviewQ regroup actions for hidden posts
* UX: reviewQ > approve/reject buttons
* UX: reviewQ add fadeout
* UX: reviewQ styling
* DEV: move scores back into component
* UX: reviewQ mobile styling
* UX: score table on mobile
* UX: reviewQ > move meta info outside table
* UX: reviewQ > score layout fixes
* DEV: readd `agree_and_keep` and fix the spec tests.
* Fix the spec tests
* fix the quint test
* DEV: readd deleting replies
* UX: reviewQ copy tweaks
* DEV: readd test for ignore + delete replies
* Remove old
* FIX: Add perform_ignore back in for backwards compat
* DEV: add an action alias `ignore` for `ignore_and_do_nothing`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Martin Brennan <martin@discourse.org>
Co-authored-by: Vinoth Kannan <svkn.87@gmail.com>
* FIX: Remove action buttons if post has already been reviewed
* Change the approve to reject test to expect an error
* Adds a controller spec to ensure you can't edit a non-pending review item
* Remove unnessary conditional
Users who can access the review queue can claim a pending reviewable(s) which means that the claimed reviewable(s) can only be handled by the user who claimed it. Currently, we show claimed reviewables in the user menu, but this can be annoying for other reviewers because they can't do anything about a reviewable claimed by someone. So this PR makes sure that we only show in the user menu reviewables that are claimed by nobody or claimed by the current user.
Internal topic: t/77235.
Currently, the reviewables tab in the user menu shows pending reviewables at the top of the menu and fills the remaining space in the menu with old/handled reviewables. This PR makes the revieables tab show only pending reviewables and hides the tab altogether from the menu if there are no pending reviewables. We're going to follow-up with another change soon that will show pending reviewables in the main tab of the user menu.
Internal topic: t/73220.
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.
Subclasses must call #delete_user_actions inside build_actions to support user deletion. The method adds a delete user bundle, which has a delete and a delete + block option. Every subclass is responsible for implementing these actions.
The previous commits removed reviewables leading to a bad user
experience. This commit updates the status, replaces actions with a
message and greys out the reviewable.
* FIX: Store Reviewable's force_review as a boolean.
Using the `force_review` flag raises the score to hit the minimum visibility threshold. This strategy turned out to be ineffective on sites with a high number of flags, where these values could rapidly fluctuate.
This change adds a `force_review` column on the reviewables table and modifies the `Reviewable#list_for` method to show these items when passing the `status: :pending` option, even if the score is not high enough. ReviewableQueuedPosts and ReviewableUsers are always created using this option.
We were getting errors like this in Reviewables in some cases:
```
ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid (PG::AmbiguousColumn: ERROR: column reference "category_id" is ambiguous
LINE 4: ...TRUE) OR (reviewable_by_group_id IN (NULL))) AND (category_i...
```
The problem that was making everything go boom is that plugins can add their own custom filters for Reviewables. If one is doing an INNER JOIN on topics, which has its own category_id column, we would get the above AmbiguousColumn error. The solution here is to just make all references to the reviewable columns in the list_for and viewable_by code prefixed by the table name e.g. reviewables.category_id.
Forums without previously calculated scores would return the same values
for low/medium/high sensitivity. Now those are scaled based on the
default value.
The default value has also been changed from 10.0 to 12.5 based on
observing data from live discourse forums.
If a post is flagged after an action was already performed on it, it
will update the previous Reviable instance and not create a new one.
The notification logic was implemented in the :create callback which was
completely skipped in this case.
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.
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
Kris
Gary Pendergast
Ted Johansson
Sérgio Saquetim
Loïc Guitaut
Krzysztof Kotlarek
Martin Brennan
Osama Sayegh
Daniel Waterworth
Blake Erickson
David Taylor
Roman Rizzi
Mark VanLandingham
Dan Ungureanu
jbrw
Martin Brennan
Robin Ward
Guo Xiang Tan