Sometimes users ask us to delete their mobile numbers for them.
If those users are on email auth, they should be able to
delete their number themselves.
This will save them writing a support ticket and save us
going into the database.
The pages you were redirected to if you selected either GOV.UK branding
or NHS branding used to give information about the branding and have a
button that submitted a Zendesk ticket. Now, we show a preview of the
new branding and the button applies it.
The `.email_branding_govuk` and `.email_branding_govuk_and_org` routes
shared a template since the content was the same - the only difference
was in the action of the button. However, since the pages will no longer
be so similar (e.g. the govuk page will show a preview) this splits them
up to use separate templates.
It may be the case that when the branding work is complete these pages
are fairly similar and we decided that one template between the two
endpoints is the best option again.
Having to submit the form for each choice separately slowed us down
during an incident where Redis was unavailable and came back with
stale data, which we had to clear manually.
Note: we don't want to use the "flush" feature in case there are other
keys in Redis, which may not be safe to remove.
This will make it easier to add another test / feature to clear all
the cache keys. It's debatable which of "sum" and "max" is useful:
- "max" is a better (although still not accurate) indicator of the
number of "things" affected e.g. templates, services, etc.
- "sum" makes sense in places where "max" doesn't e.g. when we clear
the "organisations" group, which doesn't equate to individual orgs.
Using "sum() ... across" seems like a reasonable compromise and makes
it clear that we're iterating over different kinds of keys.
While the pluralisation is nice, I don't think it's worth the effort
to make it work for both "object(s)" and "format(s)".
This repeats the pattern we already have for previewing a letter,
where we assume the error is because the notification has already
been sent and redirect the user to see it.
I've improved the original pattern a bit:
- I've DRYed-up the low-level boto code and moved the error handler
there so it can be reused.
- I've introduced a custom exception, which the calling code can
choose to log.
- I've introduced the moto library, which we use elsewhere, to make
it easier to test S3 code.
I've used an error level log when sending a notification - now that
we have a more descriptive log, we can verify the assumption is true
and then make an informed decision to downgrade the log.
In future we may want to merge this handler with the similar code
in utils [1], but we'll need to be careful as the utils handler is
superficial - it doesn't check the reason for the error.
[1]: bce0f4e596/notifications_utils/s3.py (L52)
This strengthens the initial check of what's in the session to make
sure it contains some kind of recipient. Without this, we get:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/vcap/deps/0/python/lib/python3.9/site-packages/flask/app.py", line 1950, in full_dispatch_request
rv = self.dispatch_request()
File "/home/vcap/deps/0/python/lib/python3.9/site-packages/flask/app.py", line 1936, in dispatch_request
return self.view_functions[rule.endpoint](**req.view_args)
File "/home/vcap/app/app/utils/user.py", line 26, in wrap_func
return func(*args, **kwargs)
File "/home/vcap/app/app/main/views/send.py", line 1041, in send_notification
recipient=session['recipient'] or InsensitiveDict(session['placeholders'])['address line 1'],
File "/home/vcap/deps/0/python/lib/python3.9/site-packages/notifications_utils/insensitive_dict.py", line 41, in __getitem__
return super().__getitem__(self.make_key(key))
KeyError: 'addressline1'
I'm not sure how to reproduce this, but this should at least give
the user a better experience, instead of a 500 page.
Changes:
53.0.0
---
* `notifications_utils.columns.Columns` has moved to
`notifications_utils.insensitive_dict.InsensitiveDict`
* `notifications_utils.columns.Rows` has moved to
`notifications_utils.recipients.Rows`
* `notifications_utils.columns.Cell` has moved to
`notifications_utils.recipients.Cell`
52.0.0
---
* Deprecate the following unused `redis_client` functions:
- `redis_client.increment_hash_value`
- `redis_client.decrement_hash_value`
- `redis_client.get_all_from_hash`
- `redis_client.set_hash_and_expire`
- `redis_client.expire`
51.3.1
---
* Bump govuk-bank-holidays to cache holidays for next year.
51.3.0
---
* Log exception and stacktrace when Celery tasks fail.
The endpoint to change the email branding to "GOV.UK" branding and
"GOV.UK and organisation" branding was the same but with a query string
used to determine which of the two options had been selected. This makes
them two separate endpoints, which makes the code a bit simpler and
hopefully means there is less chance of things not working as expected.
We've changed the URLs for these endpoints but needed to keep the old
URLs in place in addition to the new URLs in case anyone was in the
middle of changing their branding as the change was being deployed.
We can now safely remove the old URLs.
This changes the URLs for someone to request new email or letter
branding to match the new URLs we've agreed for the new email branding
changes. The old URLs are still in place for now too to keep backwards
compatibility.
It shouldn't be possible to view the page to confirm that you want a
particular type of email branding if that branding is not allowed for
your service. Although we don't show banned branding options on the
branding form, it would have been possible to visit the relevant URLs
directly.
We now give a `404` status page if you visit a page to select branding
that isn't allowed.
We were showing the form to request email branding with a button which
submits your choice immediately. Now, we only submit the form
immediately if "Something else" is the only branding option available to
you. If you select any other radio button (or select "Something else"
when it's not the only option) we take you to another page which either
contains more information or a textbox to fill in the details for the
branding you want.
There is currently some duplication between the new pages and their
tests, but these will be changed in future versions of the work so will
start to differ more.
The endpoint used to handle both email and letter branding, but this
replaces `.branding_request` with `.email_branding_request` and
`.letter_branding_request` instead. This is in preparation for changing
how email branding works.
The `from_template` arg was only possible for letter branding, so I've
removed that from the `.email_branding_request` endpoint.
Having this as a function which does string parsing and manipulation
surprised me a bit when I was trying to figure out why something wasn’t
working.
It’s more in line with the way we do other config like this (for example
`ASSET_PATH`) to make it a simple config variable, rather than trying to
be clever and guess things based on other config variables.
It’s also less code, and is explicit enough that it doesn’t need tests.
This field caused some confusion and lots of unnecessary work
to our colleague because of unclear name.
The field was named sms_fragments, where in fact the value of
the field is: those sms fragments that go above free allowance
multiplied by the rate multiplier.
The new name was chosen through consultation with colleagues
who use billing report the most.
This adds a link next to the organisation team members which lets
them be removed from the organisation. Service team members have
their own page and the link to remove them appears there. For
organisation team members, we don't currently have any other
information we want to show or any other actions to perform. As
a result, this change uses the 'Team members' page to show the
confirmation banner.
The endpoint called 'edit_user_org_permissions' was renamed to
'edit_organisation_user' and some of the existing code around deleting
org users (which didn't work) was changed.
When checking the service or organisation name for uniqueness before
changing it, it would be necessary to exclude the current name from
this check. However now we are changing it immediately we don’t need
to guard around this behaviour of the uniqueness check.
So this commit removes the guard for both renaming a service and an
organisation.
Note that this is copied from the same change made to the rename service
page:
1190e4541b
The original idea behind was to always ask users to re-enter their
password any time:
- we want them to be sure that they want to do what they’re about to do
- we want to be sure it’s really the user trying to do the thing (and
not someone malicious)
In reality we:
- removed this from the initial place it was added (a descendent of the
‘suspend service’ feature)
- only ever added it to the ‘rename service’ and ‘rename organisation’
features
So in reality it’s not a pattern we have persisted with. Arguably there
are several things you can now do in the admin app without re-entering
your password which are much more high consequence than changing the
service name.
Also, with browser autofill there’s a lot less chance that forcing
someone to re-enter a password really gives much defence against an
unattended laptop, for example.
So this commit removes the need to re-enter your password when renaming
an organisation.
If you submit the rename organisation form without making any changes
you will get an error saying that the name is currently in use. This is
true because it’s being used by the current organisation.
However your intention is probably not to actually change anything, so
we can just redirect back to the settings page.
This is the same thing we do when renaming services:
60f5b74904/app/main/views/service_settings.py (L99-L100)
We have a `client_request` fixture which does a bunch of useful stuff
like:
- checking the status code of the response
- returning a `BeautifulSoup` object
For most tests of a platform admin view we used `platform_admin_client`
instead. This is not as good because it returns a raw `Response` object
and doesn’t do the additional checks.
This commit converts all the tests using `platform_admin_client` to:
use new `client_request` and log in as `platform_admin_user` before
making any requests.
This is also nice because it makes any test easy to parametrize with
additional users, for example to test differences in behaviour dependant
on being platform admin or not.
Some users have reported a problem with the received text message
report:
> I have tested the reply service but in the excel report the mobile
> number is showing as 4.47900E+23. How can I change the format so that
> it is show the mobile number that has replied?
This is happening because Excel is interpreting a phone number in the
format `447900900123` as a number in
[scientific notation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_notation),
in other words 4.479 × 10<sup>23</sup>.
`447900900123` is the format that our provider is giving us the number
in – there’s no guarantee it will always be in this format.
We can prevent this behaviour by putting spaces in the numbers. Excel
and Google Sheets won’t try to convert a string with spaces into a
number.
I think we used to do this for the sent text messages report but
probably stopped because we decided it was better to keep the phone
number in the same format as it had been supplied to us for
reconcilliation purposes.
If a letters that has been posted via the API has more than 10 pages it would not get a validation-failed status. This also happens for letters in a CSV upload, only the first row has been validated for having too many pages, because you need to created the pdf before getting an accurate page count.
The API has been updated to mark these letters as invalid and move the
letter to the invalid s3 bucket, the meta data is also set with the
error message and page count.
This PR updates the notification page to display the validation error.
https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/169209742
This brings a few performance improvements for RecipientCSV, which
we use to preview and process CSVs. One change also renames one of
the attributes for the class to "guestlist".
We want organisation team members to be able to see the MOU details for
their organisation. This change creates a new page called billing, which
contains these details. It's only visible to platform admin users now -
the plan is to add more information to this page, then to make it visible
to all organisation users.
The page showing the MOU covers the case of when agreement_signed is
True, when an agreement_signed is False, and when agreement_signed is
None. The case when an agreement_signed is None is very rare - it
signifies that the agreement is not signed but that we have some
service-specific agreements in place. We only have a few organisations
in this state, so it's unlikely that the content for this scenario will
be seen.
When an organisation has signed the agreement we may know the full
details (signing date, version signed, the person who signed it or who it
was signed on behalf of), or we may only have the name of the person who
signed the agreement. We show the more detailed content if possible, and
a less detailed version of the content if not.
There's a new route for downloading the agreement which is almost
identical to the existing `.service_download_agreement` route (plus the
test is almost the same), except that it takes an organisation ID
instead of a service ID.
This has several advantages:
- It gives us more room to explain the error and actions. This will
be useful for upcoming work we want to do, which will add yet more
validations for CSV uploads.
- We already use a flash to show certain kinds of errors on these
pages (just above). This is more consistent.
- It's potentially more accessible. Previously the error and the
button text used to be read out as a single sentence. Now the page
reloads and reads the flash error alone.
In theory we should show an error in both places, but this can be
confusing on pages where there's only a single form control, and
especially if the error is long.
The original idea behind was to always ask users to re-enter their
password any time:
- we want them to be sure that they want to do what they’re about to do
- we want to be sure it’s really the user trying to do the thing (and
not someone malicious)
In reality we:
- removed this from the initial place it was added (a descendent of the
‘suspend service’ feature)
- only ever added it to the ‘rename service’ feature
So in reality it’s not a pattern we have persisted with. Arguably there
are several things you can now do in the admin app without re-entering
your password which are much more high consequence than changing the
service name.
Also, with browser autofill there’s a lot less chance that forcing
someone to re-enter a password really gives much defence against an
unatteneded laptop, for example.
I also wonder whether we might get people to give better service names
if we make the process of renaming the service less intimidating.
So this commit removes the need to re-enter your password when renaming
a service.
Note that re-naming an organisation still has the same check, but I
haven’t removed that too for the sake of keeping scope of the PR small.
We think that the API is returning incorrect data for this column.
It’s going to take a while to figure out what’s going on with the
queries in the API, so this pull request temporarily removes the column
so we’ve not giving people incorrect data.
This means that the data in the report will match what’s on the page,
where the values are rounded to the nearest penny.
This uses the same string formatting to round the numbers which the
`big_number` component does, so it should round the numbers in the same
way.
This is so org level users can use this data easier for things
like determining spending per service.
We do not include sms fragments sent column and remove other sms columns
consistency.
Do not add sms fragments sent column for now until we agree on an
unambiguous name for it. The data in this column is sms billing units
multiplied by international sms weighing. My favourite for a clear
name would be 'text message credits used', but we need a naming
strategy for this.
