All we do via support is ask which organisation they work for and
manually assign their service to it. This commit makes that process self
service.
We think we have all the trusts and clinical commissioning groups
loaded into the database now.
This will make the go live process smoother for these teams.
We have a bunch of GP surgeries who want to go live. They don’t
automatically assigned to organisations. So this means a lot of back and
forth to get these organisations set up, and then the service has to
re-request to go live, and… it’s painful.
Instead, let’s let GPs create their own organisations, by confirming the
name of their organisation before going on to letting them accept the
agreement.
We used to give users the right version of the agreement by guessing
their organisation from their email address.
Now we do it by looking at the organisation of the service they’re
looking at.
In other words, users should only be downloading the agreement as part
of the go live journey, not outside it. This is because we think that
users will get confused if they download the agreement and:
- find there’s nowhere to physically sign it
- think that accepting the agreement is all they need to do to go live
Maintaining two paths to download the agreement also makes the code more
complicated, and makes it harder to update the content on these pages.
Rather than force us to write the decorators in a specific order let’s
just have one decorator call the other. This should make fewer lines of
code, and fewer annoying test failures. It also means that the same way
of raising a `401` (through the `current_app` method) is used
everywhere.
At the moment we mostly have `user_has_permissions` execute first. It
shouldn’t matter, but it feels right for us to check that a user is
logged in before we check their permissions to a service. Otherwise a
malicious user could (maybe) check if a service ID belongs to a real
service, and go on to do something malicious with that information.
This commit adds some extra test code to enforce that the order is
always the same.
N.B. decorators in Python execute from closest to furthest (from the
line on which the function is defined).
We accidentally miss these sometimes. This code adds a test which
inspects the code to automatically check that any function which:
- handles a route
- accepts a service_id
For each function it checks that each of these routes have the
permissions decorator we’d expect.
Most of the introspection/AST code is adapted from here:
https://mvdwoord.github.io/exploration/2017/08/18/ast_explore.html
A user might not have a guessable organisation type, even if the service
they’re working on does have an organisation set. This can happen for
users with @nhs.net email addresses, for example.
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.
Usually the service’s organisation and the user’s current organisation
will be the same. But this won’t be the case when:
- someone with a non-government email address is looking at the page
- someone from our team, as a platform admin user, is looking at the
page (it will show Cabinet Office instead)
This commit fixes these problems by explicitly looking at the service’s
organisation. We couldn’t do this previously because when this page
wasn’t service-specific `current_service` was not guaranteed to be set.
Our usability testing found that jumping out of the service when going
to download the agreement made it difficult for people to find their way
back to the ‘Request to go live’ page.
This commit adds a duplicate, service-specific versions of these pages
which have the same content but:
- keep the service navigation
- have a link back to the ‘Request to go live’ page
Separated s3_client.py into 3 files - for logos, CSV files and the MOU.
This helps to keep things clearer now that we need to add lots more logo
functions for letters.
If we don’t know whether people belong to a crown organisation we should
give them the option of self-selecting, because they might themselves
know.
This commit adds a new version of the ‘agreement’ page which gives
people exactly that choice. It doesn’t link to it yet.
Rather than making users contact us to get the agreement, we should just
let them download it, when we know which version to send them.
This commit adds two endpoints:
- one to serve a page which links to the agreement
- one to serve the agreement itself
These pages are not linked to anywhere because the underlying files
don’t exist yet. So I haven’t bothered putting real content on the page
yet either. I imagine the deploy sequence will be:
1. Upload the files to the buckets in each environment
2. Deploy this code through each enviroment, checking the links work
3. Make another PR to start linking to the endpoints added by this
commit
