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 already have a pattern for navigation folders and searching for
templates – let’s use it for the copy page too. And I reckon we can
represent services as folders if the user has multiple services they
could copy a template from.
Updated the move folder form to add a hint for the radio button for the
current folder saying 'current folder'. This hint does not get shown if
you are viewing all folders (so you are not inside a folder).
Also stopped a default radio button from being selected on the form.
so that they better align with the front-end, where they'll be used in
data attributes. Also, making the kebab case is nice because it doesn't
give favouritism to either JS or python naming conventions
This saves one call to the API or Redis in the common case where the
current service does have templates.
This is because `any()` evaluates all expressions before running,
whereas `or` will only evaluate the second expression if the first
returns `False`-y.
Since we’re letting users add new folders directly from the choose page
it makes sense that they should also be able to add templates from
there.
This resolves the problem we saw in user research where people found it
hard to know where to go to add a new folder when they were all behind
one green button.
this lets us combine the two actions to create "Move to a new folder".
If the user hits enter rather than clicking a button, there is a hidden
submit button that (for now) prevents them from taking any action.
A future commit will try and understand what the user might be doing
based on which fields are populated/selected.
Since you can now see them when searching you should also be able to
select and move them. Which means that they needed to be included in
the `Form`’s list of possible choices of things to move.
The Jinja template for the ‘choose templates’ page is now pulling in
data from a lot of diparate places in order to work out what to show. As
we add more logic about what to show (in order to make the live search
work) it’s going to get harder to have all this logic in the Jinja
template.
This commit refactors it back into Python where we have more language
features for managing complex logic.
It’s a bit weird to call this file a model, in that it’s dealing with
some presentational logic, rather than just data. Conceptually it’s more
like a view model[1].
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93viewmodel
We reckon it’s jarring to have the search box appear and disappear as
you navigate through the folders.
Instead it should appear whenever your service has more things
(templates or folders) than you can easily keep in your head (let’s go
with 7 for now).
This keeps the bahviour the same for current services that don’t have
any folders.
If the folder is completely empty, always say ‘This folder is empty’, so
we don’t suggest that you can click around and find other things.
If the current view is filtered, but there are templates available in
other filters, say ‘There are no text message templates in this folder’
to make it clear why you can’t see anything.
The search box should only be shown if there are too many items to
quickly scan on the page. This number is judged to be 7; see the
original PR for more context:
https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-admin/pull/1195
This commit makes that logic work in the world of folders, by explicitly
counting the templates shown on the screen, not all the templates a
service has (which may be spread across multiple folders).
It’s weird that this page changes when you click delete – it looks like
you’re going to a different page.
It should feel like you’re on the same page, just with the confirmation
message.
The problem we had before is that the rename form would `POST` to
`…/delete`, which would then delete the template instead of updating
its name.
We can fix this by explicitly setting the `action` attribute on the
rename form to always post to `…/manage`, even if the user is currently
looking at the `…/delete` page.
Often people will be editing the existing name, not changing it
completely.
This matches what we do when someone wants to rename their template or
service.
In multiple user research sessions we’ve noticed people edit the
auto-generated template name to put something at the end of it.
This is fiddly because of the quotes we put around the name:
> Copy of ‘Exiting template’
It also means that if they keep our prefix then the template doesn’t
sort alongside the one it’s replacing.
This commit changes the name of copied templates to better match the
behaviour our users are showing.
Also adds a bit of auto numbering, just as a nice detail.
A folder is relevant if it, or any of its descents contain a template of
the kind you’re looking for.
If you’re not filtering by template type then you should see all
folders.
- Add a GET / POST view: manage template folder
- Add a template for that view, where a user can rename their
folder
- Add an API client method for updating a folder
- Test the new feature, including the test that service without
permissions cannot manage a folder
This commit adds logic to:
- take the list of selected folders and templates
- split it into two lists (of folders and templates)
- `POST` that data to the API, to effect the movement of said folders
and templates
I’ve tried to architect it in such a way that we can easily add more
template ‘operations’ in the future, as we add more forms to the choose
template page.
