We’re not going to have an API for sending broadcasts at the moment, so
you don’t need the template ID for anything.
Broadcast also won’t contain personal information, or tokenised links,
etc, so there’s no need to redact them after sending.
Removing this things means the interface is less cluttered.
These are just so we have some pages to click through for now. They
don’t use real templates, or any of the broadcast stuff from the
database.
But I think it’s useful to get some skeleton pages in first so that we
can see the map etc working in production, then build on that, without
having to do it all in one mega PR.
For that reason there are two short term things I’ve done in this commit
which should be revisited soon:
- no tests for the endpoints
- data about which areas are selected is stored in the session
At the moment this won’t look like much, but it will let us do an
end-to-end run of adding a broadcast template.
At the moment all you can do with a broadcast template is edit it, so
there’s no ‘Send’ link on the page.
At the moment the page is the same as for text message templates,
except:
- different H1
- no guidance about personalisation, links, etc (until we decide how
these should work)
For now you won’t be able to really create a broadcast template, because
the API doesn’t support it (the API will respond with a 400). But that’s
OK because no real services have the broadcast permission yet.
This required a bit of refactoring of how we check which template types
a service can use, because there were some hard-coded assumptions about
emails and text messages.
This involves three changes which broke our code.
To validate email addresses, the optional dependency `email-validator`
must be installed<sup>1</sup>. But since we don’t use WTForms’ email
validation, we shouldn’t need to subclass it – it can just be its own
self contained thing. Then we don’t need to add the extra dependency.
When rendering textareas, and extra `\r\n` is inserted at the beginning
<sup>2</sup>. Browsers will strip this when displaying the textbox and
submitting the form, but some of our tests need updating to account for
this.
The error message for when you don’t choose an option from some radio
buttons has now changed. Rather than just accepting WTForms’ new
message, this commit makes the error messages like the examples from
the Design System<sup>3</sup>. By default it will say ‘Select an
option’, but by passing in an extra parameter (`thing`) it can be
customised to be more specific, for example ‘Select a type of
organisation’.
***
1. https://github.com/wtforms/wtforms/pull/429
2. https://github.com/wtforms/wtforms/issues/238
3. https://design-system.service.gov.uk/components/radios/#error-messages
We had 7 classes in _grids.scss named `.column-...` which were being
used to give a certain column width. These worked by using `@include
grid column()`, which is now deprecated.
`.column-whole` and `.column-three-quarters` can be removed and replaced
with `govuk-grid-column-full` and `govuk-grid-column-three-quarters`
respectively. The other column classes don't have a direct replacment in
GOV.UK Frontend. To get round this, we overwrite the `$govuk-grid-width`
SASS map in `extensions.scss` to add in extra widths, then use this with
the `govuk-grid-column` mixin to create new classes in for our custom
widths in `_grids.scss`
This replaces the buttons that aren't part of a macro and that we don't
need to write additional styles for with their govuk-frontend equivalent.
There were some links that were styled to look like buttons, so these
have also been replaced with the new govuk-frontend macro.
There was one button on the `choose-account.html` template that was in a
section of code that was never reached - this has been deleted.
As per https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/170796514 we want to make the delete template confirmation dialog box more consistent and clear.
The API has been updated with a new endpoint that only returns the last-used date, this date is more accurate since it goes to the ft_notification_status table, if the notification table is empty.
make sure everything is using the `nl2br` formatter that properly wraps
it in markdown to keep everything sanitised nicely. Also write a couple
of tests
This stops most instances of the fixtures which return sms senders,
email reply to addresses or letter contact blocks from being called as
if they were functions in the tests by replacing them with functions
which return the same results.
This change allows a couple of fixtures which are now longer used to be
deleted.
We were using user fixtures in a lot of parameterized tests, but this is
no longer allowed in Pytest 5. To avoid having to split up the parametrized
tests (which would make the test files a lot longer and slightly more
difficult to read) this commit creates functions which return various types
of user json so that we can use these as the test parameters instead.
Since we’re only showing this page to team who are using the API we
don’t have to worry about explaining what’s going on in terms of the
spreadsheet any more.
This makes the page simpler.
We introduced the ‘breaking change’ page[1] partly to help teach people
about the relationship between the placeholders in their template and
the data they were providing. Data can be provided either by API or by
uploading a spreadsheet. The users who we struggled to communicate this
relationship to were the ones using the upload a spreadsheet feature.
We made two changes to the context of this feature:
1. Around the same time we introduced the interactive tour[2], which
ultimately proved to be the thing that helped people understand the
relationship between the data they were providing and the
placeholders in the template.
2. We introduced a way for people to send one-off messages without
using the API or uploading a spreadsheet[3]. So for this page to say
that you’ll need to update a spreadsheet or change an API call if you
change the placeholders in your template is no longer accurate.
Therefore I think it makes sense to only show this page to teams who are
using the API to send messages. The best proxy we have for that is to
look at whether they’ve created any API keys.
***
1. https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-admin/pull/631
2. https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-admin/pull/613
3. https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-admin/pull/1293
We mostly rely on the API returning a 404 to generate 404s for trying
to get things with non-UUID IDs. This is fine, except our tests often
mock these API calls. So it could look like everything is working fine,
except the thing your passing in might never be a valid UUID, and thus
would 404 in a non-test environment.
So this commit:
1. uses the `uuid` URL converter everywhere there’s something that looks
like an ID in a URL parameter
2. adds a test which automates checking for 1.
HighlightTags was bad because:
- we haven’t called placeholders ‘tags’ for a long time
- it also does resizing of the `<textarea>`, not just highlighting the
placeholders
of course it's logged in, it's a platform admin
also, reduce use of the `client` fixture in test_platform_admin
(replace it with platform_admin_client)
It looks weird to have two different visual treatments for showing a
navigable hierarchy.
I reckon losing the slash won’t make things less folder like – Windows
for example uses chevrons as foler separators.
The data flow of other bits of our application looks like this:
```
API (returns JSON)
⬇
API client (returns a built in type, usually `dict`)
⬇
Model (returns an instance, eg of type `Service`)
⬇
View (returns HTML)
```
The user API client was architected weirdly, in that it returned a model
directly, like this:
```
API (returns JSON)
⬇
API client (returns a model, of type `User`, `InvitedUser`, etc)
⬇
View (returns HTML)
```
This mixing of different layers of the application is bad because it
makes it hard to write model code that doesn’t have circular
dependencies. As our application gets more complicated we will be
relying more on models to manage this complexity, so we should make it
easy, not hard to write them.
It also means that most of our mocking was of the User model, not just
the underlying JSON. So it would have been easy to introduce subtle bugs
to the user model, because it wasn’t being comprehensively tested. A lot
of the changed lines of code in this commit mean changing the tests to
mock only the JSON, which means that the model layer gets implicitly
tested.
For those reasons this commit changes the user API client to return
JSON, not an instance of `User` or other models.
This removes the edit_folder_permission checks from the code, enabling
the folder permissions for all services.
This also fixes folder-related tests to set up appropriate user
permissions.
This should only be merged right after alphagov/notifications-api#2428,
when all other permission stories are done.
The Design System has standardised on back links being at the top of the
page, decorated with a small text-coloured arrow.
I think this makes more sense than having them at the bottom, because it
suggests, in some way, being able to go back before commiting to any of
the forms on the page. Whereas the things at the bottom of the page
should be performing actions on what’s in the page.
The reason for making this change now is that it de-clutters the area
around the green buttons. This was presenting a design challenge where
multiple levels of interaction were happening in the same form. Moving
these back links to the top of the page should mean that, in these
complicated forms, there’s one fewer thing to compete for the user’s
attention.
I’ve componentised this into a `page_header` macro so that the change is
easier to roll out and maintain.
Instead of using the API client directly views are now calling one
of two Service model methods:
`get_template` is used for view actions, where the user should see
the template page even if they don't have access to the template
folder (since all templates are still inked from the dashboard or
the sent notifications pages).
`get_template_with_user_permission_or_403` will check if the user
has access to the template's folder first and return 403 otherwise.
This method is used for any endpoints that result in an action: editing
template attributes, deleting templates or sending messages.
It:
- saves repetetive boilerplate code
- does some extra checks (eg checking for a `200` response)
- makes the codebase less confusing to consistently do the same thing in
the same way
