compose_box: Replace compose box with a banner when cannot post in a channel #886

sm-sayedi · 2024-08-12T19:43:23Z

When a user cannot post in a channel based on ZulipStream.channelPostPolicy, all parts of the compose box (in both channel and topic narrow) are replaced with a banner, saying: You do not have permission to post in this channel.

Screenshot

Screen recording

channel-policy-based.compose.box.mp4

Fixes: #674

rajveermalviya

Thanks for working on this @sm-sayedi, this looks great!

Moving on to the mentor review from @hackerkid.

chrisbobbe

Thanks! Comments below, covering everything except the tests added in the main, last commit:

compose_box: Replace compose box with a banner when cannot post in a channel

because I've suggested a cleanup that should help me review those tests more efficiently; see below. 🙂

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-16T23:49:00Z

lib/api/model/initial_snapshot.dart

+  /// Search for "realm_waiting_period_threshold" in https://zulip.com/api/register-queue.
+  /// 
+  /// For how to determine if a user is a full member, see:


Suggested change

/// Search for "realm_waiting_period_threshold" in https://zulip.com/api/register-queue.

///

/// For how to determine if a user is a full member, see:

/// Search for "realm_waiting_period_threshold" in https://zulip.com/api/register-queue.

///

/// For how to determine if a user is a full member, see:

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-16T23:55:37Z

lib/model/store.dart

@@ -319,6 +321,8 @@ class PerAccountStore extends ChangeNotifier with ChannelStore, MessageStore {

  String get zulipVersion => account.zulipVersion;
  final int maxFileUploadSizeMib; // No event for this.
+  /// For docs, please see [InitialSnapshot.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold].
+  final int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold;


Suggested change

final int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold;

final int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold; // TODO(#668): update this realm setting

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T00:01:45Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+
+  // This is determined based on:
+  //   https://zulip.com/api/roles-and-permissions#determining-if-a-user-is-a-full-member
+  bool isFullMember(int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold) {
+    final dateJoined = DateTime.parse(this.dateJoined);
+    return DateTime.now().difference(dateJoined).inDays >= realmWaitingPeriodThreshold;
+  }


This method's name isn't quite a match for what it does. Compare zulip-mobile:

/** * Whether the user has passed the realm's waiting period to be a full member. * * See: * https://zulip.com/api/roles-and-permissions#determining-if-a-user-is-a-full-member * * To determine if a user is a full member, callers must also check that the * user's role is at least Role.Member. * * […] */ export function getHasUserPassedWaitingPeriod(state: PerAccountState, userId: UserId): boolean { const { waitingPeriodThreshold } = getRealm(state); const { date_joined } = getUserForId(state, userId); const intervalLengthInDays = (Date.now() - Date.parse(date_joined)) / 86400_000; // […] // TODO(?): […] return intervalLengthInDays >= waitingPeriodThreshold; }

How about we call it hasPassedWaitingPeriod, and give it a dartdoc along the lines of the jsdoc in zulip-mobile.

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T00:19:49Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+    return switch (channelPostPolicy) {
+      ChannelPostPolicy.any            => true,
+      ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers    => role != UserRole.guest && (role == UserRole.member
+                                            ? user.isFullMember(realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)
+                                            : true),
+      ChannelPostPolicy.moderators     => role != UserRole.guest && role != UserRole.member,
+      ChannelPostPolicy.administrators => role == UserRole.administrator || role == UserRole.owner || role == UserRole.unknown,
+      ChannelPostPolicy.unknown        => true,
+    };


I think a helpful simplification here would be to add a method on UserRole:

bool isAtLeast(UserRole threshold) {

which could be used here, but also anywhere else we need to do role checks. In zulip-mobile it's simple:

export function roleIsAtLeast(thisRole: Role, thresholdRole: Role): boolean { return (thisRole: number) <= (thresholdRole: number); // Roles with more privilege have lower numbers. }

I think I remember concluding that "roles with more privilege have lower numbers" is basically an API guarantee. It would be pretty odd if it weren't guaranteed, given the values in the current API.

And with that encapsulated in UserRole, I think I'd feel pretty comfortable making an improvement over the logic here: when servers give an API value we don't recognize—say, 350, which would be between 300 "moderator" and 400 "member"—we could still store that value, and use it in the new isAtLeast method. (I'd be less comfortable passing around apiValue values outside the UserRole implementation itself, but it seems very appropriate to do within it.)

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T00:25:58Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+  Future<GlobalKey<ComposeBoxController>> prepareComposeBox(WidgetTester tester, {
+    required Narrow narrow,
+    User? selfUser,
+    int daysToBecomeFullMember = 0,


This means exactly the same thing as realmWaitingPeriodThreshold, right? Let's just call it realmWaitingPeriodThreshold, so we don't have to think about another name and decide if it means something subtly different.

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T00:51:02Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+
+  // This is determined based on:
+  //   https://zulip.com/api/roles-and-permissions#determining-if-a-user-is-a-full-member
+  bool isFullMember(int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold) {


Instead of calling DateTime.now() inside this API-model code, how about we compute it in UI code and pass the value down to here? A possible post-launch refinement might be to recheck, at regular time intervals, if enough time has passed that the user has become a full member. The natural place to do that will be near the UI code responsible for choosing whether to show the error banner.

(This caused me to think of a small, similar improvement we'll want to make eventually. I've filed that just now as #891.)

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T01:01:45Z

assets/l10n/app_en.arb

@@ -188,6 +188,10 @@
  "@errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel": {
    "description": "Label text for error banner when sending a message to one or multiple deactivated users."
  },
+  "errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel": "You do not have permission to post in this channel.",
+  "@errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel": {
+    "description": "Label text for error banner when sending a message in a channel with no posting permission."


Suggested change

"description": "Label text for error banner when sending a message in a channel with no posting permission."

"description": "Error-banner text replacing the compose box when you do not have permission to send a message to the channel."

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T01:07:43Z

lib/widgets/compose_box.dart

@@ -999,8 +999,21 @@ class _StreamComposeBoxState extends State<_StreamComposeBox> implements Compose
    super.dispose();
  }

+  Widget? _errorBanner(BuildContext context) {


There's already an _errorBanner method, in _FixedDestinationComposeBoxState, and it duplicates a lot of this logic. Can we centralize the computation, perhaps in an early-return style in the build method of ComposeBox?

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-17T01:17:01Z

test/widgets/action_sheet_test.dart

-  await store.addUser(eg.user(userId: message.senderId));
+  await store.addUsers([eg.selfUser, eg.user(userId: message.senderId)]);


compose_box: Replace compose box with a banner when cannot post in a channel

This seems like a reasonable change to the action-sheet tests, but why is it needed in this commit, which is about the compose box?

…Ah, I think I understand: it's a boring but necessary bit of setup so that the simulated action sheet doesn't crash in the code that decides whether to show the error banner. Is that right?

There are quite a few other changes in this commit that look like they're made for the same reason. Would you move those to a prep commit before this commit? That should make it easier to focus on the interesting changes here. 🙂

sm-sayedi · 2024-08-19T19:58:49Z

Thanks @chrisbobbe for the review! Revision pushed with the tests cleaned up. PTAL!

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-21T21:40:49Z

Thanks! Ah, it looks like this has gathered some conflicts—would you mind rebasing and resolving those please?

sm-sayedi · 2024-08-22T03:58:26Z

Conflicts resolved @chrisbobbe! Please have a look!

chrisbobbe

Thanks! Comments below, all small.

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-26T22:49:48Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+  bool isAtLeast(UserRole role) {
+    return (apiValue ?? 0) <= (role.apiValue ?? 0);
+  }


If not implementing it now, let's add a TODO for this part that I mentioned at #886 (comment) :

[…] when servers give an API value we don't recognize—say, 350, which would be between 300 "moderator" and 400 "member"—we could still store that value, and use it in the new isAtLeast method. (I'd be less comfortable passing around apiValue values outside the UserRole implementation itself, but it seems very appropriate to do within it.)

In this revision, where we treat all unrecognized values as though they were 0, we'll give wrong results when the unrecognized role from the server is meant to be less privileged than the threshold role.

when servers give an API value we don't recognize—say, 350, which would be between 300 "moderator" and 400 "member"—we could still store that value, and use it in the new isAtLeast method.

I think in the current code for UserRole we get UserRole.unknown for all the unrecognized API values. With that being said, we cannot get that new unrecognized value to compare it with the threshold apiValue. 🙂

The proposal is to store the unrecognized API value so that isAtLeast can get its hands on it :). Looking closer, I think that would need some preparation, though, such as converting UserRole from an enum to a plain class.

Greg reminds me that we don't actually expect any more API values to be added, though, because the "role" concept is on track to be replaced by "user groups". So the work I've described for handling unrecognized values won't be worth it.

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-26T22:57:55Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

@@ -318,8 +336,10 @@ void main() {
    });

    group('attach from camera', () {
-      testWidgets('success', (tester) async {
-        final controllerKey = await prepareComposeBox(tester, narrow: ChannelNarrow(eg.stream().streamId));
+      testWidgets('succMessageListPageState.narrowess', (tester) async {


chrisbobbe · 2024-08-26T23:07:49Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+      final testCases = [
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.unknown, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.guest, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.member, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.moderator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.administrator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.owner, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.unknown, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.guest, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.member, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.moderator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.administrator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.owner, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.unknown, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.guest, false),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.member, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.moderator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.administrator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.owner, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.unknown, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.guest, false),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.member, false),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.moderator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.administrator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.owner, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.unknown, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.guest, false),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.member, false),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.moderator, false),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.administrator, true),
+        (ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.owner, true),
+      ];


To make this a bit easier to scan:

Suggested change

final testCases = [

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.guest, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.member, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.guest, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.member, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.guest, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.member, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.guest, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.member, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.guest, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.member, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.moderator, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.owner, true),

];

final testCases = [

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.guest, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.member, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.unknown, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.guest, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.member, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.any, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.guest, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.member, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.guest, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.member, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.moderator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.moderators, UserRole.owner, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.unknown, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.guest, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.member, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.moderator, false),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.administrator, true),

(ChannelPostPolicy.administrators, UserRole.owner, true),

];

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-27T01:50:28Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+
+      }
+
+      group('only "full member" user can post in channel with "fullMembers" policy', (){


Suggested change

group('only "full member" user can post in channel with "fullMembers" policy', (){

group('only "full member" user can post in channel with "fullMembers" policy', () {

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-27T01:58:22Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+        });
+
+      }


Suggested change

});

}

});

}

chrisbobbe · 2024-08-27T01:59:04Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+            streams: [eg.stream(streamId: 1, channelPostPolicy: policy)],
+          );


Suggested change

streams: [eg.stream(streamId: 1, channelPostPolicy: policy)],

);

streams: [eg.stream(streamId: 1, channelPostPolicy: policy)]);

(here and in in many places later in this file)

This is necessary in the next commit(s) where wee need to determine if a a user has become a full member. For how to determine if a user is a full member, see: https://zulip.com/api/roles-and-permissions#determining-if-a-user-is-a-full-member

Also add `UserRole.isAtLeast` method.

…rams The additional params are: selfUser, streams, and realmWaitingPeriodThreshold.

Adding these is necessary for the next commit(s), otherwise these tests will fail.

…channel Fixes: zulip#674

sm-sayedi · 2024-10-07T03:23:23Z

Thanks @chrisbobbe for the review. Pushed the new changes. Also added #886 comment. PTAL.

cc @PIG208

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T21:22:11Z

lib/model/store.dart

@@ -235,6 +235,7 @@ class PerAccountStore extends ChangeNotifier with EmojiStore, ChannelStore, Mess
      connection: connection,
      realmUrl: realmUrl,
      maxFileUploadSizeMib: initialSnapshot.maxFileUploadSizeMib,
+      realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: initialSnapshot.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold,


Looks like this should come before maxFileUploadSizeMib.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T21:28:43Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+  /// To determine if a user is a full member, callers must also check that the
+  /// user's role is at least Role.Member.
+  bool hasPassedWaitingPeriod(DateTime byDate, int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold) {
+    final dateJoined = DateTime.parse(this.dateJoined);


We could simplify this by parsing dateJoined as we deserialize the User JSON object.

We could, but I'd prefer to keep that parsing deferred: converting user objects from JSON is a hot spot performance-wise, because there can be so many of them, and parsing a DateTime is the sort of thing that I feel could easily be slow.

And conversely I think there's only a few places like here where we care about the value of dateJoined, so it's not much burden on code complexity for these to have to handle the parsing; and they're all for just one user at a time, so there's no performance concern.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T21:42:20Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+  Future<GlobalKey<ComposeBoxController>> prepareComposeBox(WidgetTester tester, {
+    required Narrow narrow,
+    User? selfUser,
+    int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold = 0,


nit:

Suggested change

int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold = 0,

int? realmWaitingPeriodThreshold,

which allows us to reuse the default on eg.initialSnapshot.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T21:48:31Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+      final channelId = narrow is ChannelNarrow ? narrow.streamId : (narrow as TopicNarrow).streamId;
+      assert(streams.any((stream) => stream.streamId == channelId),
+        'Add a channel with "streamId" the same as of $narrow.streamId to the store.');
+    }


Looks like this belongs to the previous commit.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:05:46Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+
+  bool isAtLeast(UserRole threshold) {
+    // Roles with more privilege have lower [apiValue].
+    return (apiValue ?? 0) <= (threshold.apiValue ?? 0);


Looking at this, I was thinking about why 0 is chosen as the default value for both operands. Considering the context this helper is used, I suppose that we want to fallback to the behavior that, when the role has an unknown value, we allow the user to post.

This consideration is specific to the posting permission feature we are implementing here. I think the best thing to do is to assert that both api values are non-null; then we handle the case when either of them is null in hasPostingPermission.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:14:41Z

lib/widgets/compose_box.dart

+      case TopicNarrow narrow:
+        final channel = store.streams[narrow.streamId]!;
+        return channel.hasPostingPermission(selfUser, byDate: DateTime.now(), realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: store.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)
+          ? null : _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context).errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel);


nit: let's extract ZulipLocalizations.of(context) as a variable

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:18:21Z

lib/widgets/compose_box.dart

+      case ChannelNarrow narrow:
+        final channel = store.streams[narrow.streamId]!;
+        return channel.hasPostingPermission(selfUser, byDate: DateTime.now(), realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: store.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)
+          ? null : _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context).errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel);
+      case TopicNarrow narrow:
+        final channel = store.streams[narrow.streamId]!;
+        return channel.hasPostingPermission(selfUser, byDate: DateTime.now(), realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: store.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)
+          ? null : _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context).errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel);


Then we can simplify this to:

Suggested change

case ChannelNarrow narrow:

final channel = store.streams[narrow.streamId]!;

return channel.hasPostingPermission(selfUser, byDate: DateTime.now(), realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: store.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)

? null : _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context).errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel);

case TopicNarrow narrow:

final channel = store.streams[narrow.streamId]!;

return channel.hasPostingPermission(selfUser, byDate: DateTime.now(), realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: store.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)

? null : _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context).errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel);

case ChannelNarrow(:final streamId):

case TopicNarrow(:final streamId):

final channel = store.streams[streamId]!;

if (channel.hasPostingPermission(selfUser, byDate: DateTime.now(),

realmWaitingPeriodThreshold: store.realmWaitingPeriodThreshold)) {

return _ErrorBanner(

label: localizations.errorBannerCannotPostInChannelLabel);

}

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:22:45Z

lib/widgets/compose_box.dart

+        return hasDeactivatedUser ? _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context)
+          .errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel) : null;


nit: to make the lines shorter:

Suggested change

return hasDeactivatedUser ? _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context)

.errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel) : null;

if (hasDeactivatedUser) {

return _ErrorBanner(

label: localizations.errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel);

}

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:28:42Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart


-    group('1:1 DMs', () {


Looks like we are both moving tests to groups and adding the new tests.
The grouping part can be done in a prep commit so the diffs will be easier to read.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:30:34Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+      for (final testCase in testCases) {
+        final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) = testCase;


nit:

Suggested change

for (final testCase in testCases) {

final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) = testCase;

for (final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) in testCases) {

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:30:34Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

+      for (final testCase in testCases) {
+        final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) = testCase;


nit:

Suggested change

for (final testCase in testCases) {

final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) = testCase;

for (final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) in testCases) {

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:38:00Z

test/widgets/compose_box_test.dart

        checkComposeBox(isShown: false);
      });

-      testWidgets('all deactivated users become active -> '


Hmm, the deletion is a bit far apart from where it was re-added.

A goal of restructuring the change would be that we have one commit that moves the old tests, and one that only adds the new ones.

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:39:30Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

@@ -382,6 +387,19 @@ class ZulipStream {
    _$ZulipStreamFromJson(json);

  Map<String, dynamic> toJson() => _$ZulipStreamToJson(this);
+
+  bool hasPostingPermission(User user, {required DateTime byDate, required int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold}) {


nit: let's break this into multiple lines

PIG208 · 2024-10-10T22:45:33Z

lib/api/model/model.dart

+    final role = user.role;
+    return switch (channelPostPolicy) {
+      ChannelPostPolicy.any            => true,
+      ChannelPostPolicy.fullMembers    => role.isAtLeast(UserRole.member) && (role == UserRole.member


nit: by turning this into || we can replace the ... ? ... : true clause with ... && ...

sm-sayedi added the buddy review GSoC buddy review needed. label Aug 12, 2024

sm-sayedi requested a review from rajveermalviya August 12, 2024 19:43

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch 3 times, most recently from b0d63db to 570d2ac Compare August 13, 2024 06:46

rajveermalviya approved these changes Aug 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

sm-sayedi added mentor review GSoC mentor review needed. and removed buddy review GSoC buddy review needed. labels Aug 14, 2024

sm-sayedi requested a review from hackerkid August 14, 2024 15:16

sm-sayedi added the maintainer review PR ready for review by Zulip maintainers label Aug 14, 2024

sm-sayedi requested a review from chrisbobbe August 14, 2024 15:21

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch 2 times, most recently from ae0a4ff to 2a44121 Compare August 15, 2024 04:14

sm-sayedi mentioned this pull request Aug 15, 2024

api: Add stream/update event #880

Merged

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch from 2a44121 to c005b48 Compare August 16, 2024 15:22

chrisbobbe reviewed Aug 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch from c005b48 to 41ab0e9 Compare August 19, 2024 19:55

sm-sayedi requested a review from chrisbobbe August 19, 2024 19:58

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch from 41ab0e9 to 0837859 Compare August 20, 2024 14:03

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch from 0837859 to 169a790 Compare August 22, 2024 03:45

chrisbobbe reviewed Aug 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

gnprice assigned PIG208 Sep 12, 2024

sm-sayedi added 5 commits October 7, 2024 06:53

store: Add realmWaitingPeriodThreshold to PerAccountStore

9616005

model: Add hasPassedWaitingPeriod helper method to User

6cf3dd9

model: Add hasPostingPermission helper method to ZulipStream

d1c16a9

Also add `UserRole.isAtLeast` method.

test [nfc]: Have eg.user accept dateJoined and role

5aaad2d

sm-sayedi added 3 commits October 7, 2024 07:30

compose_box test [nfc]: Have prepareComposeBox accept additional pa…

dc9a330

…rams The additional params are: selfUser, streams, and realmWaitingPeriodThreshold.

test [nfc]: Add streams and eg.selfUser to store in several tests

58276c3

Adding these is necessary for the next commit(s), otherwise these tests will fail.

compose_box: Replace compose box with a banner when cannot post in a …

be0d74d

…channel Fixes: zulip#674

sm-sayedi force-pushed the issue-674-hide-compose-box-according-channel-posting-policy branch from 169a790 to be0d74d Compare October 7, 2024 03:21

sm-sayedi requested review from chrisbobbe and PIG208 October 7, 2024 03:23

PIG208 reviewed Oct 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

	final int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold;
	final int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold; // TODO(#668): update this realm setting

	"description": "Label text for error banner when sending a message in a channel with no posting permission."
	"description": "Error-banner text replacing the compose box when you do not have permission to send a message to the channel."

		await store.addUser(eg.user(userId: message.senderId));
		await store.addUsers([eg.selfUser, eg.user(userId: message.senderId)]);


		}

		group('only "full member" user can post in channel with "fullMembers" policy', (){

-        });
-      }
+        });
+      }

		streams: [eg.stream(streamId: 1, channelPostPolicy: policy)],
		);

	int realmWaitingPeriodThreshold = 0,
	int? realmWaitingPeriodThreshold,

		return hasDeactivatedUser ? _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context)
		.errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel) : null;

-        return hasDeactivatedUser ? _ErrorBanner(label: ZulipLocalizations.of(context)
-          .errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel) : null;
+        if (hasDeactivatedUser) {
+          return _ErrorBanner(
+            label: localizations.errorBannerDeactivatedDmLabel);
+        }

		for (final testCase in testCases) {
		final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) = testCase;

	for (final testCase in testCases) {
	final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) = testCase;
	for (final (ChannelPostPolicy policy, UserRole role, bool canPost) in testCases) {

compose_box: Replace compose box with a banner when cannot post in a channel #886

Are you sure you want to change the base?

compose_box: Replace compose box with a banner when cannot post in a channel #886

Conversation

sm-sayedi commented Aug 12, 2024 • edited Loading

Screenshot

Screen recording

rajveermalviya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

chrisbobbe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sm-sayedi commented Aug 19, 2024 • edited Loading

chrisbobbe commented Aug 21, 2024

sm-sayedi commented Aug 22, 2024

chrisbobbe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sm-sayedi commented Oct 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PIG208 Oct 10, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sm-sayedi commented Aug 12, 2024 •

edited

Loading

sm-sayedi commented Aug 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

PIG208 Oct 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading