When we get a request for new branding it’s helpful to quickly see what
the service’s current branding is, so we can get a better sense of why
they want to change it.
It should be:
- if they have said they are going to send by a certain channel, show
the extra required task(s) for that channel
- if they haven’t said, infer from which templates they have
If you have email templates but haven’t told us what volumes you’re
sending we should assume you are going to send emails. We should only
stop asking you to add a reply-to address once you’ve told us for sure
you’re not going to send any emails.
This also applies to changing the text message sender – this should only
be hidden if you don’t have text message templates or you’ve said you’re
not going to be sending any text messages.
We have a number of go live requests where people have said they’re
sending text messages, but haven’t changed the text message sender from
the default of `GOVUK` (we ask teams who aren’t central government to do
this). At the moment we don’t prompt them to, because we look at whether
they have text message templates as indicative of whether they’re going
to send text messages.
Now that we explicitly ask for the volumes of text messages they’re
sending we should use this to determine whether or not we prompt them to
change their text message sender because it’s a stronger signal of
intent than what templates they’ve set up.
We have a number of go live requests where people have said they’re
sending email, but haven’t set up a reply-to address. At the moment we
don’t prompt them to, because we look at whether they have email
templates as indicative of whether they’re going to send email.
Now that we explicitly ask for the volumes of email they’re sending we
should use this to determine whether or not we prompt them to set up an
email reply to address because it’s a stronger signal of intent than
what templates they’ve set up.
At the moment it 500s because it can’t format the `None` values as
numbers.
In the future we will stop people requesting to go live until they’ve
provided this info. For now it has to be optional.
Things we talked about:
• asking users to write the number 'as numerals' or 'using digits' isn't
very plain English
• the style guide says to use an example in the error `..., like 5,000`
but not if you have an example in the hint text, so we can't do that
• I have reservations about 'correct format', because it sounds odd if
you're not describing something like a phone number, NI number or
credit card number.
Looking back through Request to Go Live tickets on Zendesk.
---
I got to September before I found anything that would count as invalid
under our new rules:
> Possibly around 1,000,000- not planning on implementing emails yet but
might change
I'll keep looking, but if most people enter the number according to the
hint example we might be able to go with a much simpler error just
prompting them to enter a number – no convoluted descriptions of what we
mean by a number
There seemed to be more problems when the Qs were about start volume and
peak volume. Users felt the need to explain their plans more.
Using 'number' instead of 'volume' is more explicit too – so that
probably helps.
In terms of errors:
`Enter the number of emails you expect to send`
`Enter the number of text messages you expect to send`
`Enter the number of letters you expect to send`
– will probably do it, right?
It’s annoying and very ‘computer says no’ to make people type `0` in a
box. We can see from our analytics that this error is affecting about 7%
of users trying to go live.
This commit relaxes the validation to only require a number greater than
1 for at least one of the questions.
It also lets people enter their numbers comma-separated – like our
examples suggest – but normalises them to integers before sending them
over to the API.
We get a bunch of requests to go live where people have told us they're
going to send email but there is no email reply-to address present.
These come from 2 scenarios:
1. when there are email templates, and no reply to address – but they
ignore the checklist
2. when there are no email templates (yet) but they provide anticipated
volumes for email
At the moment we only auto-check for a reply to address when they have
email templates. And because the question about anticipated volumes
follows the checklist, you'll get a checklist that passes (reply
addresses not required as no templates present) - but your future intent
that differs (reply address IS required because you have anticipated
volumes).
So let’s bring the request for anticipated volumes into the checklist,
that way we can dynamically add the requirement for a reply to address
if they say they will send email but don't have templates yet.
We should begin storing it in the database against the service to stop
people having to re-enter it each time they try to complete the go live
screens.
This also means moving the ‘consent to research question’ along with
the questions about volume, because
- we want people to answer both before going live
- we don’t want to clutter up the summary page by asking questions there
too
Most of the existing platform admin buttons on the service settings
page used to issue GET requests to switch service settings. This
means they weren't protected by CSRF. On top of that as our number
of service permissions increases over time a lot of buttons on the
page made it hard to work with.
To fix these issues we replace most of the buttons with rows in the
platform admin settings table. Each setting has a 'Change' link that
leads to a page with an On/Off switch form.
This removes "research mode" switch completely since we're planning
to deprecate it in the future and we don't expect to switch any new
services into research mode at the moment.
Most service permissions are now handled by a shared endpoint that
is parameterized with the permission name. Some permissions that
require some additional logic before they can be toggled (like document
upload, which requires setting a contact address) have separate
initial endpoints that redirect to `set_service_permission`.
"Archive", "Suspend" and "Resume" actions are kept as buttons since
they display a confirmation banner (which is a CSRF-protected form)
and they're not easily represented as an On/Off switch.
This adds a new OnOffField class that implements a boolean field
that is rendered as two On / Off radio buttons. This allows us to
avoid comparing 'on' and 'off' string values in the views since
the field takes care of transforming form data into python booleans.
This also adds a form class that can be used for any single On / Off
switch forms (e.g. service permissions).
This adds a preview pane which is visible when updating a letter brand.
If JavaScript is enabled, the preview pane shows on the set-letter-branding
page, and submitting the form saves updates the letter brand for a service
immediately. If Javascript is not enabled, there is a separate 'Preview email
branding' page which shows a preview of the brand and has a 'Save' button on it.
Because some people don’t know they can put their own logo on letters:
> The HM Government Logo is at the top of the letter and we can't see
> a way of putting the [organisation] logo on
> We are intending to use the letter template feature for the first time
> and wondered whether the branding is configurable or whether the HM
> Government header is the standard default.
> Can we replace HM Government logo with our own in the letter? IF yes,
> then how?
> I don't seem to be able to set the branding on the letters to be
> [organisation]. it's always HM government. Is there something that
> needs enabling for this account?
No-one actually wants the HM Government logo (no-one is sending real
letters using it). So we should leave the space blank and put a button
there prompting people to add their own logo.
it wouldn't show search if there were under a certain amount of letter
or email branding options - however we know there will always be more
than that amount so lets remove some complexity.
Also, rename the SearchTemplatesForm because it can search anything -
it just prompts you to search by name is all.
We were getting all letter logos from a method in the email branding
client. Since we will be adding more client methods to deal with
letters, it makes things clearer to separate the email and letter
branding clients.
We are moving from the postage being set on the service to being set on
the template. Once a service has been migrated to have the new
permission they should no longer be able to set the postage at a service
level, only at the template level.
specifically - don't use `pytest.mark.xfail` directly in parametrize,
instead use `pytest.param(*args, marks=pytest.mark.xfail)`. the old way
is deprecated in pytest4 - for more information see
https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/deprecations.html#marks-in-pytest-mark-parametrize
Also, make this an error in pytest.ini so if someone adds a new xfail,
it'll crash
Only users who work for government can accept the terms of use. This
will save us from having to email these requesters back telling them
they need to find someone else to submit the request.
We suggest people format their numbers with commas when telling us how
many things they’re going to send.
This causes problems when we paste these values into a spreadsheet,
because the commas get interpreted as column separators.
Adds caching for service data retention. This removes separate API
client methods to retrieve individual data retention records by id
or type in favor of a single method that fetches and caches all
retention settings configured for the service. This makes it much
easier to invalidate cache when settings change.
Lookup by id or type is provided by helper methods in the service
model.
WTForms coerces `None` as a choice to `'None'` as a string when
rendering form fields (form fields will only ever have string data
because that what the browser posts back).
But internally WTForms coerces `None` to mean an unset value, ie where
the user hasn’t selected a radio button:
283b280320/src/wtforms/utils.py (L1-L20)
We shouldn’t use `None` to mean two different things. And in fact we
can’t, because it in effect means that we’re always getting a value
for the `move_to` field, even if the user hasn’t chosen to move any
templates. Which results in some very expected behaviour.
If the browser posts the value of `<input value='None'>` to the server
it does so as a string.
We want to post a value of `None` (actually JSON `null`) to the API. To
do this we:
- set the value in the form class to `'None'` (ie a string)
- convert to `None` (as a type) afterwards
However seeing `x = 'None'` in code looks a bit like a mistake. So to
make sure it looks deliberate and clear what is happening this commit:
- makes a reusable constant for `'None'`
- adds a comment explaining why it’s a string
With the addition of template folders we need to filter templates
based on a combination of type and parent folder ID.
This replaces the existing `templates_by_type` method with
`get_templates`, which supports both type and parent folder filters,
avoiding a need to create specific methods for each use case.
We still need the templates property to exist in some way in order
to cache it, but it needs to be clear that it's different from
`.get_templates`. One option was to make it "private" (i.e. `_templates`),
and always use `.get_templates` in the rest of the code, but this requires
adding "include all folders" to `.get_templates`, which doesn't have an
obvious interface since `parent_folder_id=None` already means "top-level
only".
This will probably come up again when we need to look into adding
templates from nested folders into the page for live search, but
for now renaming `Service.templates` to `.all_templates` makes it
clear what the property contains.
