Note: I've removed the pricing assertion in the "0_free_allowance"
test as it's covered elsewhere - the value of the test is really to
check that we don't show the remainder if there never was any.
The previous, manual calculation could be incorrect depending on
which SMS rates the free allowance was attributed to.
The new field also supersedes the old "letter_total" bolt-on so we
can get cost information consistently for both types.
This adds missing assertions for email and SMS usage, as well as
letters with the help of some additional test data.
Previously we were only checking monthly usage (in other tests).
The "with_letters" was mostly a duplicate of the one before - no
change in test setup - bar the three assertions at the end.
Having the assertions in a separate test will help keep the one
above manageable as we add more assertions for the annual usage.
At the moment, we put the sms rate on the usage page for each
months billing data by taking the single sms rate for the year.
The assumption that there will be a single sms rate for the year is
no longer going to be true. Therefore, instead we take the sms
rate from the monthly data itself which tells us the rate for
a months worth of sent SMS.
Some tests use the `client` fixture but don’t call any of its methods.
The reason for doing this is because the test depends on something in
the request context.
This commit replaces all those instances with `client_request`, which
also sets the request context.
These tests are the last ones that still use the `client` fixture. By
replacing it with `client_request` we will be able to say that no tests
should be using the `client` fixture directly.
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
Lots of our tests still use an older fixture called `client`. This is
not as good because it:
- returns a raw `Response` object
- doesn’t do the additional checks
- means our tests contain a lot of repetetive boilerplate like `page = BeautifulSoup(response.data.decode('utf-8'), 'html.parser')`
This commit converts all the tests which had a `client.login(…)`
statement to use `client_request` (which is already logged in by
default).
Subsequent commits will remove uses of `client` in other tests, but
doing it this way means the work can be broken up into more manageable
chunks.
We added a new argument to `client_request.get` and
`client_request.post` to specify that it should return a raw `Response`
object rather than an instance of `BeautifulSoup`.
This is useful because sometimes we need to look at stuff like the
response headers.
However it turns out we already have a separate method for this, so
rather than invent something new I think it’s better to stick with the
thing we already have.
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
Lots of our tests still use an older fixture called `logged_in_client`.
This is not as good because:
- it returns a raw `Response` object
- doesn’t do the additional checks
- means our tests contain a lot of repetetive boilerplate like `page = BeautifulSoup(response.data.decode('utf-8'), 'html.parser')`
This commit converts all the tests using `logged_in_client` to:
use `client_request` instead.
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.
We've added new broadcast roles in the database (`create_broadcasts` and
`approve_broadcasts`).
Adding these has meant we've needed to do a bit of a rewrite of the roles and
permissions code since this had been based on the assumption that each
database permission only belongs to one admin role - this is no longer true.
This means that flipping the roles dict round to create a dict which
contains database permissions as the keys is no longer possible. We can't
necessarily tell which admin role someone has given a database permission.
To check if a user has an admin role given a list of database permissions,
the user must now have ALL the database permissions mapped to that role
(instead of just one). This works because no one has the `manage_users`
permission without also having the `manage_settings` (and similar for
the other admin roles which map to multiple database permissions).
Some test data was changed because it was using admin roles where
database permissions are actually used when the app is running. I've kept
the functionality of the `translate_permissions_from_db_to_admin_roles`
function passing through any unknown roles it is passed as an argument.
This is not necessary, so can be changed later if we decide it will not
ever be used. However, removing it would require updating a lot of
tests since the tests rely on this behaviour.
This naming was introduced in 2016 without explanation [1]. I find it
confusing because:
- It's reminiscent of "_app", which is a Python convention indicating
the variable is internal, so maybe avoid using it.
- It suggests there's some other "app" fixture I should be using (there
isn't, though).
The Python style guide describes using an underscore suffix to avoid
clashes with inbuilt names [1], which is sort of applicable if we need
to import the "app" module [2]. However, we can also avoid clashes by
choosing a different name, without the strange underscore.
[1]: 3b1d521c10
[2]: 78824f54fd/tests/app/main/views/test_forgot_password.py (L5)
Previously there was no indication that a service was suspended.
While this could also be shown for archived/deleted services, the
meaning is similar enough that it makes sense there too - the name
of the archived service should distinguish it as being archived.
For someone who has retrieved a template ID from their system the only
way to find it in Notify is:
- hack the URL
- click through every template, visually inspecting the ID shown on the
page until you find the right one
Neither of these is ideal.
This commit adds searching by ID, for those services who have an API
integration. This means we don’t need to confuse teams who aren’t using
the API by talking about IDs.
This is similar to how we let these teams search for notifications by
reference[1]
1. https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-admin/pull/3223/files
An accessiblity audit done as part of Notify's
service assessment raised the following problem
with our big_number component.
When you turn CSS off, the sentence in the
component is split onto separate lines.
This was because the number part is wrapped in a
<div> which browsers were interpreting as being a
separate sentence to the label.
So "1 letter", where "letter" is the label, was
seen as:
"1"
"letter"
The accessibility expert consulted on this pointed
out that this would sound confusing for users of
screen readers when moving through the document
sentence by sentence.
These changes:
- make the <div>s into <span>s which are 'phrasing
content' and so are interpreted as part of the
same sentence
- change the CSS so the number will still sit
on top of its label text
The HTML5 spec has a section on how browsers
should arrange text into paragraphs that explains
what was happening in more detail:
https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/dom.html#paragraphs
The api returns letter details split by postage, so international
letters are returned with a postage of `europe` or `rest-of-world` not
`international` and these rows need to be added together when the rate
is the same before they are displayed on the usage page.
To do this, we need to replace the postage of `europe` and
`rest-of-world` with `international`. The data then needs to be sorted
by postage and rate before the letter units for rows which are
international and have the same rate are added together.
From a question on cross-government Slack:
> re the Usage tab - currently it shows 3 financial years - last year,
> this year and next year. is it possible to replace the "next year" tab
> with something more useful? its always going to be blank! I was
> thinking it would be good to have 2 financial years ago, 1 financial
> year ago and this financial year.
This seems like a reasonable idea, and is something we’ve talked about
before. The original intention[1] was that seeing your (unchanged) free
allowance for next year would be useful, but that doesn’t really seem to
be a user need.
***
1. See https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-admin/pull/1094
> so that you can check what your SMS allowance is going to be before
> you actually get into it
A lot of pages in the admin app are now generated entirely from Redis,
without touching the API.
The one remaining API call that a lot of pages make, when the user is
platform admin or a member of an organisation, is to get the name of
the current service’s organisation.
This commit adds some code to start caching that as well, which should
speed up page load times for when we’re clicking around the admin app
(it’s typically 100ms just to get the organisation, and more than that
when the API is under load).
This means changing the service model to get the organisation from the
API by ID, not by service ID. Otherwise it would be very hard to clear
the cache if the name of the organisation ever changed.
We can’t cache the whole organisation because it has a
`count_of_live_services` field which can change at any time, without an
update being made.
It was saying ‘16 hours ago’ instead of today. This is because, in
strftime:
- `%M` means minute, not month
- `%D` means short MM/DD/YY date, not day of the month
The test wasn’t catching this because the freeze time and mocked value
from the API were set to the same minute.
We’ve done this already for services with the upload letters permission.
And all services can upload letters now.
But we’re still returning it in the JSON response we use to AJAX-ify the
page.
Since the jobs response can query stats for up to 50 jobs at a time this
puts some load on the API/database. Hopefully this might drop that load
a bit.
Scheduled jobs push everything else on the dashboard down, which makes
them very prominent. This is exacerbated by people scheduling more jobs
simultaneously than we expected when we originally designed the feature.
We also want to remove all jobs from the dashboard, in favour of putting
them on the uploads page.
So this commit replaces them with one of our new dashboard banners (used
for received text messages in returned letters) which summarises:
- how many scheduled jobs you have
- when the first one is going out (i.e. how long you have to stop it, if
you need to)
Currently you have no way of getting to the returned letter page. This
commit adds a link to it from the dashboard, following the pattern of
the new received text messages banner.
This commit adds a new kind of banner to the dashboard for summarising
things you might need to action.
This way we’ll be able to have multiple instances of this banner on the
same page without it looking too intense.
I never really liked the big blue banner for inbound text messages
because it became the most prominent thing on the page. It was an
interim solution that let us ship the feature until we had something
better.
This test looks for how many times the string `50` appears in the text
of the `<main>` element of the page. The `<main>` element also contains
some times, for example 1:23pm.
This means that when the time reaches 1:50pm, 2:50pm, etc the number of
times the string `50` appears in the page changes. Which causes the test
assertions to fail.
This follows the pattern of what we’ve done with services, users and
events.
It gives us a way of neatly instantiating a model for each item in the
list we get back from the API and reduces the complexity of the view
layer code.
Now is a good time to do this because we’re going to be making a bunch
of changes to the jobs pages, and those changes will be easier to code
and understand with a sensible model behind them.
