Settings looked at `domains.yml` when users were making go live requests
or email branding requests.
This will allow us to remove the `domains.yml` file, by using
information about organisations that is now stored in the database
instead.
Dealing with users who request to go live but haven’t completed all the
steps still represents a significant support overhead for our team.
We’ve made some improvements to the percentage of incomplete requests
with a better page design, but ultimately because it still shows the
button people think it’s OK to press the button while some of the items
on the page still say [Not completed].
We can do this now because organisations are in the database, which
means we can mark the agreement signed as soon as we get it back,
without having to deploy code.
We should audit when a service manager changes a user profile that is not
their own. This can be recorded in our events table, which is currently
only used to record successful logins.
This adds two new types of event, `update_user_email` and
`update_user_mobile_number` which store the
- browser fingerprint
- IP address
- user id of the user being updated
- user id of the service manager making the change
- original email address and new email address (for `update_user_email`
events)
- original mobile number and new mobile number (for
`update_user_mobile_number` events)
Shows a count of how many folders that user can see - this doesn't do
anything smart with parent folder stuff, it's just "how many checkboxes
are ticked on the edit page".
* doesn't show if service has no folders
* doesn't show if service hasn't got folder permissions enabled
We keep getting people requesting branding when they already have the
branding they want set. Seems like they don’t realise we’re doing it
automatically. This might help.
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.
User model is the most natural place for a permission check method,
however this means that we need to pass the full user object to
service model methods and TemplateList instead of user_id.
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
remove `confirm` from `confirm_remove_user_from_service` as there's
only one action now that the initial confirmation prompt takes place
on the edit permissions page
when you hit the delete button, it flashes the delete button and takes
you to the `/service/../user/../delete` url. If you then click the save
button, it would make a POST to the delete URL... and delete the user.
now the page stays on the edit url, but adds a `?delete=yes` query
string. The dangerous flash banner now has an action field which
defines where the browser will make the POST to (which remains at
/delete).
Adds a front end for:
https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-api/pull/2417
> Sometimes we have to make a few services for what really is one
> service, for example GOV.UK Pay and GOV.UK Pay Direct Debit. We also
> have our own test services which aren’t included in the count of live
> services. We currently count these as one service by not including
> them in the beta partners spreadsheet.
If a new user is being invited for a service which doesn't have edit
folder permissions turned on, we want to send all folders for that
service to api.
The api endpoint to get all template folders also returns the users who
can see each folder.
We need to clear the template-folder cache when adding a user to a service so
that we are not using out of date data about who can see each folder.
Added a folder permissions form to the page to invite users to services.
This only shows if the service has 'edit_folder_permissions' enabled,
and all folder checkboxes are checked by default. This change means that
InviteApiClient.create_invite now sends folder_permissions through to
notifications_api (so invites get created with folder permissions).
Started passing the folder_permissions through to notifications-api when
accepting an invite. This changes UserApiClient.add_user_to_service to
send folder_permissions to notifications_api so that new users get folder
permissions when they are added to the service.
We were already invitializing InvitedUser with folder_permissions
(defaulting to None), but this removes the default and adds
folder_permissions to the serialize method. Folder permissions should
now always be returned from api, either as an empty list or a list of
UUIDs.
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.
The endpoint for adding a user to a service in api will now deal with
both user permissions and a user's folder permissions, so this changes
the format of the data we pass through.
