We removed the link to this page in commit 83e8d6035 because poll
questions don't really make sense without a poll.
However, this page also contained information about successful
proposals, which might be interesting so administrators don't have to
navigate to the public area in order to find and create questions based
on successful proposals.
So we're keeping the part about successful proposals and linking it from
the proposals part of the admin area.
Note we're using translation keys like `successful_proposals_tab`, which
don't make sense anymore, for the successful proposals. We're doing so
because we've already got translations for these keys and, if we renamed
them, we'd lose the existing translations and our translators would have
to add them again.
Also note we're changing one poll question test a little bit so we
create the question from a successful proposal using the new page. There
are other tests checking how to create a question from the
admin/proposals#show action and other tests checking what happens when
accessing a successful proposal in the admin section, so we don't lose
any test coverage by changing an existing test instead of adding a new
one.
Finally, note that we've removing the `search` method in poll question
because we no longer use it. This currently makes the
`author_visible_name` database column useless; we aren't removing it
right now because we don't want to risk a possible data loss in a patch
release (we're about to release version 2.3.1), but we might remove it
in the future.
There are many possible ways to implement this feature:
* Adding a custom middleware
* Using rack-attack with a blocklist
* Using routes constraints
We're choosing to use a controller concern with a redirect because it's
what we do to handle unauthorized cancancan exceptions.
Using a checkbox wasn't very intuitive because checkboxes are
checked/unchecked when clicked on even if there's an error in the
request. Usually, when checkboxes appear on a form, they don't send any
information to the server unless we click a button to send the form.
So we're using a switch instead of a checkbox, like we did to
enable/disable phases in commit 46d8bc4f0.
Note that, since we've got two switches that match the default
`dom_id(record) .toggle-switch` selector, we need to find a way to
differentiate them. We're adding the `form_class` option for that.
Also note that we're now using a separate action and removing the
JavaScript in the `update` action which assumed that AJAX requests to
this action were always related to updating the `visible_to_valuators`
attribute.
This is consistent to what we usually do. Also, we're applying the same
criteria mentioned in commit 72704d776:
> We're also making these actions idempotent, so sending many requests
> to the same action will get the same result, which wasn't the case
> with the `toggle` action. Although it's a low probability case, the
> `toggle` action could result in [selecting an investment] when trying
> to [deselect] it if someone else has [deselected it] it between the
> time the page loaded and the time the admin clicked on the
> "[Selected]" button.
This code isn't used since commit c9f31b8e1.
Since we no longer depend on the content of the `#investments` element
being in a separate partial, we're also moving this element to the
partial itself and adding an HTML class to it, like we usually do.
We're also removing the code that loads all the investments in the
`toggle_selection` action, which wasn't needed since commit 3278b3572,
when we stopped rendering all the investments in this action.
This is consistent to what we usually do. Also, we're applying the same
criteria mentioned in commit 72704d776:
> We're also making these actions idempotent, so sending many requests
> to the same action will get the same result, which wasn't the case
> with the `toggle` action. Although it's a low probability case, the
> `toggle` action could result in [selecting a proposal] when trying to
> [deselect] it if someone else has [deselected it] it between the time
> the page loaded and the time the admin clicked on the "[Selected]"
> button.
We were using `authorize_resource`, passing it an unnamed parameter.
When that happens, CanCanCan only checks permissions to read that
resource. But, in this case, we want to check the permission to update
that resource before the `update` action.
Most of the time, it doesn't really matter, but, for example, in our
demo we're going to restrict the locales configuration so locales cannot
be updated on the main tenant (but they can be updated on other
tenants).
Having a class named `Poll::Question::Answer` and another class named
`Poll::Answer` was so confusing that no developer working on the project
has ever been capable of remembering which is which for more than a few
seconds.
Furthermore, we're planning to add open answers to polls, and we might
add a reference from the `poll_answers` table to the
`poll_question_answers` table to property differentiate between open
answers and closed answers. Having yet another thing named answer would
be more than what our brains can handle (we know it because we did this
once in a prototype).
So we're renaming `Poll::Question::Answer` to `Poll::Question::Option`.
Hopefully that'll make it easier to remember. The name is also (more or
less) consistent with the `Legislation::QuestionOption` class, which is
similar.
We aren't changing the table or columns names for now in order to avoid
possible issues when upgrading (old code running with the new database
tables/columns after running the migrations but before deployment has
finished, for instance). We might do it in the future.
I've tried not to change the internationalization keys either so
existing translations would still be valid. However, since we have to
change the keys in `activerecord.yml` so methods like
`human_attribute_name` keep working, I'm also changing them in places
where similar keys were used (like `poll_question_answer` or
`poll/question/answer`).
Note that it isn't clear whether we should use `option` or
`question_option` in some cases. In order to keep things simple, we're
using `option` where we were using `answer` and `question_option` where
we were using `question_answer`.
Also note we're adding tests for the admin menu component, since at
first I forgot to change the `answers` reference there and all tests
passed.
This way we can simplify the view, particularly the form. However, we're
still adding some complexity to the form so inputs are inside labels and
so the collection is easier to style with CSS.
We're using different controls depending on the number of available
locales.
When there are only a few locales, the solution is obvious: radio
buttons to select the default language, and checkboxes to select the
available ones are simple and intuitive.
With many languages, showing two consecutive lists of 30 languages could
be confusing, though, particularly on small devices, where scrolling
through both lists could be hard.
So, in this case, we're rendering a <select> to choose the default
language. For selecting the available languages, however, we're sticking
to checkboxes because all the other existing options (like multiple
selects) are hard to use. We think it's OK because the form doesn't have
any additional fields, and there's only one big list of options to
scroll through.
While testing the application, we noticed that if we use the
`admin-fieldset-separator` styles when there's only one fieldset, it's
harder to notice that there's an additional field to select the default
language. So we're only using the `admin-fieldset-separator` styles when
all the fields are grouped in fieldsets.
Regarding the help text for the fieldset, if we leave the help text
outside the <legend> tag, people using screen readers won't hear about
this content. However, if we include it inside the <legend> tag, some
screen readers might read it every time they move to a different
checkbox (or radio button), which can be annoying. Since I don't think
these help messages are really essential, I'm leaving them out of the
<legend> tag. It's also easier to style them if they're outside the
<legend> tag.
Note we're using `display: table` for the labels, for the reasons
mentioned in commit 923c2a7ee.
Also note that, when there's only one available locale, this section is
useless. In this case, we aren't disabling it for now because there's a
chance people see it in the official Consul Democracy demo and then
wonder why it isn't available on their installation. We might disable it
in the future, though.
In the case of the `edit` action, we're using
`load_and_authorize_resource`, which will always return a
`SiteCustomization::ContentBlock`. In the case of
`edit_heading_content_block`, we're using `Budget::ContentBlock.find`,
which always returns a `Budget::ContentBlock` (or raises an exception).
So, in both cases, the condition to assign `@selected_content_block` can
be removed.
The code works without this action because both the route and the view
are specified, and by default Rails renders the view when there's no
action defined.
However, the code is easier to understand if the action is present in
the controller, which is what we do most of the time.
Now that we've moved the logic to generate the events data to a model,
and we've got access to the model in the component rendering the chart,
we can render the data inside the chart instead of doing an extra AJAX
request to get the same data.
Originally, this was problaby done this way so the page wouldn't take
several seconds to load while preparing the data for the chart when
there are thousands of dates being displayed. With an AJAX call, the
page would load as fast as usual, and then the chart would render after
a few seconds. However, we can have an even better performance
improvement in this scenario if we use a Set instead of an Array. The
method `Array#include?`, which we were calling for every date in the
data, is much slower that `Set#merge`. So now both the page and the
chart load as fast as expected.
We could also use something like:
```
def add
(...)
shared_keys.push(*collection.keys)
end
def build
(...)
shared_keys.uniq.each do |k|
(...)
end
def shared_keys
@shared_keys ||= []
end
```
Or other approaches to avoid using `Array#include?`. The performance
would be similar to the one we get when using `Set`. We're using a `Set`
because it makes more obvious that `shared_keys` is supposed to contain
unique elements.
We've had some tests failing in the past due to these AJAX requests
being triggered automatically during the tests and no expectations
checking the requests have finished, so now we're reducing the amount of
flaky tests.
We were tracking some events with Ahoy, but in an inconsistent way. For
example, we were tracking when a debate was created, but (probably
accidentally) we were only tracking proposals when they were created
from the management section. For budget investments and their supports,
we weren't using Ahoy events but checking their database tables instead.
And we were only using ahoy events for the charts; for the other stats,
we were using the real data.
While we could actually fix these issues and start tracking events
correctly, existing production data would remain broken because we
didn't track a certain event when it happened. And, besides, why should
we bother, for instance, to track when a debate is created, when we can
instead access that information in the debates table?
There are probably some features related to tracking an event and their
visits, but we weren't using them, and we were storing more user data
than we needed to.
So we're removing the track events, allowing us to simplify the code and
make it more consistent. We aren't removing the `ahoy_events` table in
case existing Consul Democracy installations use it, but we'll remove it
after releasing version 2.2.0 and adding a warning in the release notes.
This change fixes the proposal created chart, since we were only
tracking proposals created in the management section, and opens the
possibility to add more charts in the future using data we didn't track
with Ahoy.
Also note the "Level 2 user Graph" test wasn't testing the graph, so
we're changing it in order to test it. We're also moving it next to the
other graphs test and, since we were tracking the event when we were
confirming the phone, we're renaming to "Level 3 users".
Finally, note that, since we were tracking events when something was
created, we're including the `with_hidden` scope. This is also
consistent with the other stats shown in the admin section as well as
the public stats.
As mentioned in commits 5311daadf and bb958daf0, using links combined
with JavaScript to generate POST (or, in this case, DELETE) requests to
the server has a few issues.
Note that the AJAX response stopped working after replacing the link
with a button. Not sure about the reason, but, since this is one of the
very few places where we use AJAX calls to delete content, the easiest
solution is to stop using AJAX and be consistent with what we do in the
rest of the admin section.
Before this change, two important things depend on the format of each key,
where to render it in the administration panel and which kind of interface
to use for each setting. Following this strategy led us to a very complex
code, very difficult to maintain or modify. So, we do not want to depend
on the setting key structure anymore to decide how or where to render each
setting.
With this commit, we get rid of the key format-based rules. Now we render
each setting explicitly passing to it the type and the tab where it belongs.
Instead of using a setting nested param `setting[:tab]`. We only need
the tab param when rendering settings in the administration section.
This change will make it easier rendering the correct tab after
updating settings.
This rule was added in rubocop 1.44.0. It's useful to avoid accidental
`unless !condition` clauses.
Note we aren't replacing `unless zero?` with `if nonzero?` because we
never use `nonzero?`; using it sounds like `if !zero?`.
Replacing `unless any?` with `if none?` is only consistent if we also replace
`unless present?` with `if blank?`, so we're also adding this case. For
consistency, we're also replacing `unless blank?` with `if present?`.
We're also simplifying code dealing with `> 0` conditions in order to
make the code (hopefully) easier to understand.
Also for consistency, we're enabling the `Style/InverseMethods` rule,
which follows a similar idea.
Note we're excluding a few files:
* Configuration files that weren't generated by us
* Migration files that weren't generated by us
* The Gemfile, since it includes an important comment that must be on
the same line as the gem declaration
* The Budget::Stats class, since the heading statistics are a mess and
having shorter lines would require a lot of refactoring
We were using `prepend: true`, but it doesn't seem to be necessary.
We were also loading the draft versions twice in the index, so we can
remove the line loading them a second time.
We forgot to remove it in commit 8066b96fe. We're removing it now
because these methods didn't follow the Layout/BlockAlignment rubocop
rule, which we're about to add.
For the HashAlignment rule, we're using the default `key` style (keys
are aligned and values aren't) instead of the `table` style (both keys
and values are aligned) because, even if we used both in the
application, we used the `key` style a lot more. Furthermore, the
`table` style looks strange in places where there are both very long and
very short keys and sometimes we weren't even consistent with the
`table` style, aligning some keys without aligning other keys.
Ideally we could align hashes to "either key or table", so developers
can decide whether keeping the symmetry of the code is worth it in a
case-per-case basis, but Rubocop doesn't allow this option.
We were already applying these rules in most cases.
Note we aren't enabling the `MultilineArrayLineBreaks` rule because
we've got places with many elements whire it isn't clear whether
having one element per line would make the code more readable.
Since IRB has improved its support for multiline, the main argument
towars using a trailing dot no longer affects most people.
It still affects me, though, since I use Pry :), but I agree
leading dots are more readable, so I'm enabling the rule anyway.
Note that in the budgets wizard test we now create district with no
associated geozone, so the text "all city" will appear in the districts
table too, meaning we can't use `within "section", text: "All city" do`
anymore since it would result in an ambiguous match.
Co-Authored-By: Julian Herrero <microweb10@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Javi Martín <javim@elretirao.net>
This is consistent with the component for balloting stats. We're about
to change both components, and the changes are easier to follow if
they're similar.
We're also using consistent names in methods.
We're also moving the tests, but we're keeping one system test in order
to test the controller and the navigation to get to this page.
Note we're slightly changing the order of the methods in the component;
the order of the instance variables was `user_`, `vote_`, `vote_`,
`user_`, which was hard to follow.
