The scopes `created_by_admin` and `public_polls` were very similar. I'm
using `created_by_admin` because `Poll.public_polls` feels redundant,
and the reason for that name is we should not name the scope `public`
because `public` is a ruby access modifier.
Not doing so has a few gotchas when working with relations, particularly
with records which are not stored in the database.
I'm excluding the related content file because it's got a very peculiar
relationship with itself: the `has_one :opposite_related_content` has no
inverse; the relation itself is its inverse. It's a false positive since
the inverse condition is true:
```
content.opposite_related_content.opposite_related_content.object_id ==
content.object_id
```
Usually when we specify a `belongs_to` relations, we also specify its
equivalent `has_many`. That allows us to write, for example:
`topic.user.topics`.
We were inconsistent on this one. I consider it particularly useful when
a method starts with a `return` statement.
In other cases, we probably shouldn't have a guard rule in the middle of
a method in any case, but that's a different refactoring.
Joining two scopes with `+` does not remove duplicate records. Luckily
now that we've upgraded to Rails 5, we can join scopes using `.or`.
The test was testing for the presence of elements, bud didn't test for
duplicate records. Testing the exact contents of the array revealed this
behaviour.
System count isn't a relevant number because the important one is the
number of votes counted by poll officers. We're still maintaining it for
a month in case poll officers would like to review the results.
Joining the translations table caused duplicate records to appear.
Ordering with SQL is simply too hard because we need to consider
fallback locales.
Thanks Senén for providing most of the tests in the poll spec.
Budget polls behave slightly differently to non-budget polls.
In budget polls we use Budget::Ballot::Lines to verify if a user has already voted online. In non-budget polls we use Poll::Voter to verify this.
In this commit we are adding an extra check to make sure that the correct message is displayed if the user has already voted online for a budget poll[1]
[1] https://github.com/AyuntamientoMadrid/consul/blob/master/spec/features/budget_polls/voter_spec.rb#L122
This table will store which reports (stats, results, ...) will be shown
for a certain process (polls, budgets, ...).
Note Rails fails to save a poll and its report when both are new records
if we add a `validate :process, presence: true` rule. Since it caused a
lot of trouble when creating records for tests during factories rule
completely. Instead, I've created the `results_enabled=` and
`stats_enabled=` methods, so tests are easier to set up, while also
automatically creating a report if it doesn't already exist. This also
decouples form structure and database implemenation.
Originally I named this table `enabled_reports` and instead of having
`stats` and `results` columns, it had an `enabled` column and a `kind`
column, which would be set to "stats" or "results". However, although
that table would allow us to add arbitrary reports easily, I found the
way we had to handle the `has_many` relationship was a bit too complex.
We need a way to manually expire the cache for a budget or poll without
expiring the cache of every budget or poll.
Using the `updated_at` column would be dangerous because most of the
times we update a budget or a poll, we don't need to regenerate their
stats.
We've considered adding a `stats_updated_at` column to each of these
tables. However, in that case we would also need to add a similar column
in the future to every process type whose stats we want to generate.
We have two models called `Answer`: The `Answer` model and the `Poll::Answer` model.
This conflict ocurrs when trying to create a user generated poll for a proposal. from the Dashboard. In that case we are getting an exception, only in the development environment, as the class `Answer` is loaded before the class `Poll::Answer` which is the one we want to use.
With this commit we are explicitly requiring the correct model, solving the class conflict.
Some queries were accessing original column instead of the new
translatable one. This should have been causing unexpected behavior
for requests maded in a different locale than the application default.
This section is used to select to which poll a question belongs to.
Budget polls are not meant to include questions that come from Citizen
Proposals or Government Questions, thus we do not display them
This way we guarantee there will be at least one translation for a model
and we keep compatibility with the rest of the application, which
ideally isn't aware of globalize.
* Added missing specs
* Removed models that were refactored previously
* Added simplecov when executing specs locally
* Fixed bug in poll model validation that was causing an 500 error.
