This is possible now we're testing letters and emails separately.
I've added a few missing cases for NHS and non-central branding.
In the next commits we'll look at the remaining special cases.
These all behave the same as each other so there's little value in
testing all of them - if we had 100 org types we wouldn't test them
all, but it's easy to get carried away when there are fewer.
We already had different functionality for email branding and will
soon be adding more for email branding pools.
Note that the "get_available_choices" class method was only used for
email branding - we can do it in the constructor for letters.
Users who have no mobile number set, users who are not on email auth
and users who are not on "Change mobile number" page should not
see the delete link.
This made it easier to debug a problem with the functional tests
due to the fixtures not working correctly [^1]. It's a platform
admin only convenience over knowing the page URL.
We may want to expose the top-level "/api-integration" page but
that will require more work to show which broadcasts were sent with
which key - currently it's oriented around "messages". For now I
think it's useful to see what keys a service has.
[^1]: https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-functional-tests/pull/411#pullrequestreview-920069799
Our CSS for links in the navigation, which makes
the underline appear on hover is overriding the
GOVUK focus styles, making it look like there are
2 underlines. This adds some extra CSS to reset
it.
The new CSS is further down the stylesheet to the
hover styles. This gives them a higher specificity
meaning they override them when these links are
hovered over while in focus.
We added this for the 25 May demo. We’re unlikely to need it again.
We’re also unlikely to need this library again, so this commit removes
the source and the code that creates it.
Central orgs have more options than others, including the option
to revert back to GOV.UK once branding is set. Combining the tests
together should make that a bit clearer.
I've also tweaked some of the names to make them clearer e.g. that
the form is used to apply a change to a service.
I've constrained the scope of this change to avoid forms that may
be accessible by non-admins in the future.
All of the mock / UI assertions in these tests are covered by the
tests above them - these tests were mostly targetting which options
were being shown, which we can check at a lower level.
This is much simpler than trying to test the function via the page,
although there are still two scenarios to test there:
- The page with radio buttons (using NHS as an example).
- The page with a text form (using "other" as an example).
In future work we could split this test in two to make it clearer
what it's trying to test. For now, this keeps the diff simple.
This was a lot of code to be in a form and it's going to get even
more complicated with email branding pools. Moving it out means we
can also simplify the tests that target this code.
These are about to become a lot less similar to each other when we
add email branding pools. Note that the optional *args and *kwargs
weren't used anywhere.
I've often struggled to find the form associated with a particular
page due to the overlapping names e.g. "SetEmailBranding" sounds
more like the radio button form a user sees than "BrandingOptions".
Almost every form in forms.py also ends with "Form", so this also
makes the branding forms consistent with that naming convention.
I think it’s better to raise an exception and force us to fix it if we ever add a new auth_type, or use this formatter on something that isn’t a valid auth_type.
Co-authored-by: Ben Thorner <benthorner@users.noreply.github.com>
On the ‘find user’ page it says ‘sms_auth’ instead of ‘Text message
code’.
This commit fixes that, and adds a handy formatter so it’s easier to do
the right thing in the future.
