Date.new(...) does not take into account the current timezone, while other
parts of the application do. By default always parsing any date with the
default timezone and converting the resulting Time to Date would prevent
this kind of issues
DateTime.parse(...).in_time_zone gives an unexpected result, as the
DateTime.parse(...) will create a DateTime with +0000 time zone and the
`in_time_zone` will modify the DateTime to adjust to the default zone.
Maybe its better explained with an example, using 'Lima' as timezone:
DateTime.parse("2015-01-01")
> Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0000
DateTime.parse("2015-01-01").in_time_zone
> Wed, 31 Dec 2014 19:00:00 -05 -05:00
And that's not the desired date but the previous day!
The user was able to vote as many investments as wanted in the first
heading voted. However in the second heading voted, only one investment
could be voted
This was due to the previous implementation, where you could only vote
in one heading. Note the `first` call in method
`heading_voted_by_user?(user)`
This commits simplifies the logic and allows voting for any investment
in any heading that the user has previously voted in
This method was used only in Madrid’s fork, but it is now needed to
complete the backport for voting in multiple headings
There wasn’t a test in Madrid, so here goes one too. Even though, the
responsibility should probably be moved soon to the `Budget::Heading`.
For consistency with the related methods and tests it has been left in
the investment_spec
Now that we have the option of voting in multiple headings per group,
the method of voting in a “different heading assigned” has become
deprecated and thus removed
Why:
Both Newsletters and Email Downloads need the same logic: To extract the
emails from all the users in the segment that have newsletter flag
active, removing all empty email values.
How:
1- UserSegments#user_segment_emails holds that repeated logic and is used
on both Newsletter & EmailDownload.
2- Rename Newsletter#list_of_recipients to list_of_recipient_emails as
it is more descriptive. There is no need to pass entire Users around,
only the emails are needed at Mailer#newsletter method.
3- Cleanup Newsletter#list_of_recipient_emails model spec scenario
Why:
User with an empty email value (nil) should not appear in the recipient
list for a given UserSegment at Newsletters or Email Downloads.
How:
Using Enumerable#compact and Enumerable#select to filter out empty emails
Increasing Email Download feature spec and Newsletter model spec to cover
all possible scenarios including the nil email one.
Why:
UserSegments are not only used for Newsletters or Email downloads, but
also for internal Global Notifications. We don't want to have that scope
hardcoded inside UserSegments as users that have opted-out from the
newsletter should still be recipients of global notifications.
How:
Removing the scope from the UserSegments `all_users` method that acts as
base for all the other segments. Including that `newsletter` scope only
on the places that is relevant:
* When listing recipients for a newsletter
* When downloading a listing emails that can be newsletter recipients
Also updated relevant tests
Slugs should only be updated on certain conditions, we need a trait that
meets that conditions and the name of the trait passed as a mandatory &
named argument on the sluggable concern
Why:
Internal valuation comments are only for admins and valuators,
not for the public view.
How:
Adding a `not_valuations` scope and use it at the `public_for_api` one
Create a new Budget::Phase model that:
* Stablishes a relation with its budget
* Stablishes relation with two other Budget::Phases (previous and next)
* Validates basic dates range, kind and description rules.
* Adds scopes to get the ones enabled as well as each individual phase
Create a factory that generates a basic and valid Budget::Phase
Create a model spec that checks kind, date range and budget validations.
Before Budget.current could return multiple budgets, now there can only
be a single current_budget.
Adding the concept of open, which better reflects what the admin sees
in this page: A tab for open budgets and a tab for finished budgets
When there was only one budget this implementation worked fine
Nowadays there can be multiple budgets, and therefore the definition of
the current_budget has changed. It is no longer a budget that has not
finished, but rather, the last budget created that is not in the
initial drafting phase.
Budgets in the drafting phase are not considered the current_budget,
but rather a budget that is still being prepared and that soon will
become the current_budget
