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.
We were very inconsistent regarding these rules.
Personally I prefer no empty lines around blocks, clases, etc... as
recommended by the Ruby style guide [1], and they're the default values
in rubocop, so those are the settings I'm applying.
The exception is the `private` access modifier, since we were leaving
empty lines around it most of the time. That's the default rubocop rule
as well. Personally I don't have a strong preference about this one.
[1] https://rubystyle.guide/#empty-lines-around-bodies
Having exceptions is better than having silent bugs.
There are a few methods I've kept the same way they were.
The `RelatedContentScore#score_with_opposite` method is a bit peculiar:
it creates scores for both itself and the opposite related content,
which means the opposite related content will try to create the same
scores as well.
We've already got a test to check `Budget::Ballot#add_investment` when
creating a line fails ("Edge case voting a non-elegible investment").
Finally, the method `User#send_oauth_confirmation_instructions` doesn't
update the record when the email address isn't already present, leading
to the test "Try to register with the email of an already existing user,
when an unconfirmed email was provided by oauth" fo fail if we raise an
exception for an invalid user. That's because updating a user's email
doesn't update the database automatically, but instead a confirmation
email is sent.
There are also a few false positives for classes which don't have bang
methods (like the GraphQL classes) or destroying attachments.
For these reasons, I'm adding the rule with a "Refactor" severity,
meaning it's a rule we can break if necessary.
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.
Metrics/LineLength: Line is too long.
RSpec/InstanceVariable: Use let instead of an instance variable.
Layout/TrailingBlankLines: Final newline missing.
Style/StringLiterals: Prefer double-quoted strings.
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.
DEPRECATION WARNING: uniq is deprecated and will be removed from Rails
5.1 (use distinct instead) (called from block in <class:User> at
/home/travis/build/consul/consul/app/models/user.rb:67)
I've moved the method to the User model in order to make it easier to
test. I'm not sure where it belongs, though.
There was already a failing spec in `spec/features/management_spec.rb`,
but it passed if run standalone because it only failed if previous tests
had already created nine users or more.
We were seeing an exceptions in the home page when displaying
recommendations. This was due to trying to load tags of hidden proposals
With this commit we are skipping proposals that that have been hidden,
which will hopefully solve this exception
Add new routes for the proposal notifications edition and
abilities to let moderators edit it (mark as ignored, hide, etc.).
The notifications are not flaggable because they doesn't work like that,
but in a similar way. The moderator/administrator is in charge of hidding
them through the UI, so the normal users don't flag it as inappropriate.
New controller Moderation::ProposalNotification to manage the moderators
work.
changed functions on verification.rb, the first thing they do is
return true whene skip_user_verification is active.
changed show_welcome_screen? on user.rb, now its shows the welcome
page even with te option active.
changed welcome.html.erb, now if the user see this view and the
option is activated, all 4 checks are green, not only 2.
