Service contact details are needed if the upload document permission is
enabled - this used to be a link but services can now choose to use a
link, email address or phone number. The form to add or change service
contact details now gives these options and validates the data according
to the type of contact details provided.
When validating phone numbers we can't use the existing validation
because we want to allow landlines too, so there is a basic check that
the phone number is the right length and doesn't include certain
characters.
Since we have added a new, 5th permission the existing permissions
should be relabelled so that the five make sense as a coherent set.
We especially want to make sure that:
- the labels work against the checkboxes and against the tick/crosses on
the manage users page (a long time ago this page was layed out
differently so didn’t have space for full labels)
- there is no confusion between usage and reports
This commit also:
- re-adds a line about what all users can see (‘sent messages’) but
continues to omit the additional bullet points about templates and
team members (because we think this is clear enough from reading the
permissions)
- refactors the `Form` subclass so that the content and order of the
permissions only have to be defined once
- brings back the ‘permissions’ legend on the `fieldset`
Our research and prototyping around ‘basic view’ found that:
- a lot of users who send messages rarely or never look at the dashboard
(yet it’s the first page they see when they sign in)
- team managers like the idea of taking away things that users don’t
need in order to make the interface simpler
We’ve disentangled the simpler way of sending messages from being part
of ‘basic view’. This means we can give managers the option of taking
away the dashboard as an independent choice, not something that’s
wrapped up in a separate ‘view’.
I think that this checkbox is a more straightforward proposition than
‘basic view’ ever was (despite all the work we did to explain it and
develop the nested checkbox pattern). In research users would often
explain the feature back to us as being about hiding the dashboard – we
should try to make Notify operate in terms of concepts that come
naturally to people wherever possible.
We think there is some need for users who don’t need to see the
dashboard to quickly find out which messages have failed.
So this commit brings back the status filters for all users (previously
those with ‘basic view’ wouldn’t have had them).
This makes it less of a drastic change when the `view_activity`
permission is removed from a user.
The one downside of skipping the template page is that you no longer
get such strong confirmation that you’ve picked the correct template.
You still see the preview of the template, but it’s further down the
page, and the name of the template has disappeared.
This commit adds the name of the template to the page title, to:
- have some continuity from the previous page
- make it easier to double-check you’ve chosen the correct template
‘Upload recipients’ and ‘Send to one recipient’ have always been
slightly clunky phrases.
Now that basic view jumps straight into the ‘Send to one recipient’
flow there’s no way for users to get to the ‘Upload recipients’ flow.
By adding a link to it from the ‘Send to one recipient’ flow it’s
possible for users of basic view to access it.
But we don’t want to introduce too much inconsistency between basic view
and admin view because users will be migrating from one to another. They
might also be talking to their manager, who wouldn’t be able to tell
them where to click if they were looking at two completely different
interfaces.
This also means that we can keep the left-hand navigation in basic view
nice and simple with the two options (‘Templates’ and ‘Sent messages’),
rather than trying to introduce something like ‘Send one message’ and
‘Send lots of messages’ later on.
If you have the API keys permission you can see the settings page. But you
can’t change or request stuff, like email branding. So we shouldn’t show the
link that suggests you can.
We’re interested to know which services are looking at the basic view
preview (even if they’re not turning it on).
This commit logs their service IDs as events into Google Analytics.
There are some teams who send jobs on a daily/weekly basis. They have
team members who only use Notify for this purpose. So they would
probably benefit from basic view, because they don’t need to see the
dashboard.
This commit:
- adds a new item (uploaded files) to the basic view navigation for
teams that have sent at least one job
- makes the job pages visible to basic view users
I think we should do this now, rather than as a later enhancement to
basic view. We only have one chance to announce the feature, so teams
who do send jobs may otherwise discount it as not useful for them and
the opportunity to have them use it is lost.
This is better than just keying into the JSON because it means you get
an exception straight away when looking up a key that doesn’t exist
(which via mocking you could ordinarily miss).
Having the service floating about as JSON is a bit flakey. Could easily
introduce a mistake where you mistype the name of a key and silently
get `None`.
Also means doing awkward things like `if 'permission' in
current_service['permissions']`, whereas for users we can do the
much cleaner `user.has_permission()`.
So this commit:
- introduces a model
- adds a `.has_permission` method similar to the one we have for users
The list of services this page was looking at only included those not
belonging to an organisation.
On production this excludes services we’ve added to organisations to
make the management of those services easier (eg ‘GDS’ and ‘DVLA’).
Sometimes when setting up a service you might have a few very similar
templates, in which only a small amount of content. Or you might even
have a few of services, which are used by different teams but have
similar templates.
Copy and pasting, especially from one service to another, is a pain.
This commit makes it easier by allowing users to copy an existing
template when choosing to add a new one, instead of starting from
scratch.
The page where you switch on the feature
---
This content aims to describe:
- the benefit of basic view – ‘make Notify quicker and simpler’
- who it benefits – ‘team members who only need to send messages’
- how it does it – ‘by hiding…’
- what it prevents users from being able to do or see – ‘everything
except…’
- what it allows users to do – ‘send messages’, [see] ‘templates, a list
of sent messages’
I’m still keen to mention sent messages here, as it feels weird not to
mention it at all when it’s 1 of only 2 options in Basic view. I don’t
think it’s as important to mention it on the Edit team member screen.
I’ve specifically used ‘a list of sent messages’ rather than just ‘sent
messages’, to make it seem less like a noun (new feature).
The page where you choose whether someone has basic view
---
Switches the focus from what you can see to what you can’t.
Aims to be consistent with both:
- the description of permissions in admin view
- the language used to describe basic view in settings
Two tests retained the old syntax because of mocker conflict:
when logging in as a user through client_request, it sets up a
side_effect on user_api_client.get_user to the user you log in
as. If you later want to set return_value for get_user to
something else, problems start :d.
> Suggest making the H1 visible here for consistency, but also to make
> it clear to users what they’re looking at.
> This screen is similar to – but not exactly the same as – the
> individual text, email and letter dashboard screens from Admin view,
> so the H1 could help to distinguish it from them for users who may
> have interacted with both.
From Karl:
> Templates – this should be consistent with Admin view. Users may
> switch from Basic to Admin view (or vice versa), they will also
> interact with users who have a different view or permissions to them.
> Neither should have to learn new interfaces and language if possible.
> ‘Send a message’ was a nice, active label – but Notify options aren’t
> usually actions. If we’re going to change this we should be consistent
> across both Admin and Basic views.
> For the same reason, I have rejected ‘see’, ‘search’ and ‘view sent
> messages’. It will be interesting to see in user testing whether users
> read ‘sent messages’ as ‘send messages’.
- name
- email
- phone number
- services
- last login
- failed login attempts if any
The view can be accessed from results of find_users_by_email
logged_in_at added to User serialization on admin frontend as
a part of this work
