An invited user can’t be added to an organisation or service, only a
real user can. So the methods to do this should be on the user model,
and take the details of the invite as arguments.
This is an immediate fix to add the permission checks to the callback page.
However, we have a plan to add a unit test to check for permission introspectively for all routes that have service_id.
Utils 33.0.0 adds alt text to email branding - the HTMLEmailTemplate now
initializes slightly differently as a result (with both `branding_name`
and `branding_text`).
Organisation team members will be ultimately interested in the detailed
usage of each service, but shouldn't necessarily have access to the
personal data of that services users.
So we should allow these organisation team members to navigate to live
services usage page from the organisation page. They may need to contact
the team so they should also be able to view the team members page.
So they'll then see just usage and team members pages.
If they are actually a team member of the service they're viewing, then
they'll see the full range of options as usual.
This commit implement the above by adding an extra flag to the
`user.has_permissions` decorator which allows certain pages to be marked
as viewable by an organisation user. The default (for all other existing
pages) is that organisation users don’t have permission.
If the user has selected that they are accepting the agreement on behalf
of someone else then we need to make the they provide that person’s
details.
If they’ve selected that they are accepting the agreement themselves
then we have to ignore what they might have put in the ‘on behalf of
boxes’ (for example if they filled them out but then changed their
mind).
At the moment, the process for accepting the data sharing and financial
agreement is:
1. download a pdf
* print it out
* get someone to sign it
* scan it
* email it back to us
* we rename the file and save it in Google Drive
* we then update the organisation to say the MOU is signed
* sometimes we also:
* print it out and get it counter-signed
* scan it again
* email it back to the service
Let's not do that any more.
When the first service for an organisation that doesn't have the
agreement in place is in the process of going live, then they should
be able to accept the agreement online as part of the go live flow. This
commit adds the pages that let someone do that.
Where the checklist shows the agreement as **[not completed]** then
they can follow a link where they can download it (as happens now).
From here, they should then also be able to provide some info to accept
it. The info that we need is:
**Version** – because we version the agreements occasionally, we need to
know which version they are accepting. It may not be the latest one if
they downloaded it a while ago and it took time to be signed off
**Who is accepting the agreement** – this will often be someone in the
finance team, and not necessarily a team member, so we should let the
person either accept as themselves, or on behalf of someone else. If
it's on behalf of someone else we need to the name and email address of
that person so we have that on record. Obvs if it's them accepting it
themselves, we have that already (so we just store their user ID and
not their name or email address).
We then replay the collected info back in a sort of legally
binding kind of way pulling in the organisation name too. The wording
we’re using is inspired by what GOV.UK Pay have. Then there’s a big
green button they can click to accept the agreement, which stores their
user ID and and timestamp.
so that platform admins (us) can view pages as regular users do easily.
Simply adds a flag in the session cookie that overrides the actual
platform admin flag on the user model if set. This way it's safe, since
this only downgrades existing functionality, so if someone managed to
alter it they could only get less permissions, not more.
You can change this value from the user profile page if either:
* you're a platform admin
* the flag is set (to any value) on the cookie.
This slightly weird check means that we don't check the underlying
`user._platform_admin` flag anywhere in the code, even when toggling
the suppression.
This should make the ‘All organisations’ page load a lil’ bit quicker.
Still worth caching the domains separately so the response is smaller
when we only care about domains. This is because the code that uses the
domains is part of the sign up flow, so it’s really important that it’s
snappy.
The view code shouldn’t need to know the internals of a service’s data
structure; the idea of having a service model is to abstract this kind
of thing.
This makes it:
- nicer, by having access to sensibly named things like
`Service.trial_mode` instead of `service['restricted']`.
- less likely to write Jinja code like `service.trail_mode`, which would
fail silently if `service` was a dictionary
For consistency with `.organisations`/`.organisation_ids`.
`.services` returns a list of semi-rich dictionaries for each service.
`.service_ids` returns service IDs only.
In reality we shouldn’t have any live services that don’t have an
organisation. But we probably do locally, in preview, etc., and we
shouldn’t lose a way of accessing them.
Changed this yesterday. Changing it again now because I think it’s
confusing.
There’s really no going ‘back’ once you’ve sent a message – you can’t
undo it. If you want to get back to the template you used, well, that
link is in the page.
This commit changes the back link logic so it only appears when you’ve
navigated to a notification, not when you’ve just sent it.
The API needs the id of the user, not the id of the invite.
The problem with the tests is that the update mock returned a different
user ID than the user it was being passed. So the tests didn’t catch
this.
This fixes the bug where if you have three placeholders:
> ((one)) ((two)) ((three))
The first one you are asked to fill in is `((three))` (ie
`template.placeholders[-1]`).
This reintroduces a bug where if you use the ‘Use my phone number’ link
you skip straight to filling in `((two))` and can never proceed because
you’re never given the chance to fill in `((one))`. This commit also
fixes that bug.
If the user wants to go back from here they need to be sent back to the
start of entering the placeholders, because we won’t have their previous
personalisation in the session still
I think the back link on this page was introduced by accident. But it’s
good to still have it on this page, because it keeps consistency with
the previous pages.
Users can only be archived by Platform Admin from the user page
(/users/<user_id>). This removes them from all services and orgs and
updates their details.
The ‘make this default’ checkbox should be shown, except when:
- the user is adding their first email reply to address (because the
first one has to be the default)
- they’re editing the existing default (because they can’t change it
to be not default)
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.
So that you don’t have to use the footer navigation to switch between
these related pages. Matches the template we use for organising
features-related content.
At the moment we have a blanket rule that users can’t archive their own
services, to prevent someone accidentally deleting a real live service,
because that would be Very Bad.
But the tickets we get from users asking us to delete services are for
services they set up when they were just trying out Notify. There’s not
much harm in letting users delete these services, the consequences of
doing so are much lower than those of deleting a live service. And it
should mean fewer support tickets for us to deal with.
At the moment the only setting that a normal organisation team member
can change is the name of the organisation is its name. And we don’t
even want them to be able to change this. So this commit hides the
settings page entirely for non-platform-admin users.
