In order to migrate existing files from Paperclip to ActiveStorage, we
need Paperclip to find out the files associated to existing database
records. So we can't simply replace Paperclip with ActiveStorage.
That's why it's usually recommended [1] to first run the migration and
then replace Paperclip with ActiveStorage using two consecutive
deployments.
However, in our case we can't rely on two consecutive deployments
because we have to make an easy process so existing CONSUL installations
don't run into any issues. We can't just release version 1.4.0 and 1.5.0
and day and ask everyone to upgrade twice on the same day.
Instead, we're following a different plan:
* We're going to provide a Rake task (which will require Paperclip) to
migrate existing files
* We still use Paperclip to generate link and image tags
* New files are handled using both Paperclip and ActiveStorage; that
way, when we make the switch, we won't have to migrate them, and in
the meantime they'll be accessible thanks to Paperclip
* After we make the switch, we'll update the `name` column in the active
storage attachments tables in order to remove the `storage_` prefix
Regarding our handling of new files, the exception are cached
attachments. Since those attachments are temporary files used while
submitting a form and we have to delete them afterwards, we're only
handling them with Paperclip. We'll handle these ones in version 1.5.0.
Note the task creating the dev seeds was failing after these changes
with an `ActiveStorage::IntegrityError` exception because we were
opening some files without closing them. If the same file was attached
twice, it failed the second time.
We're solving it by closing the files with `File.open` and a block. Even
though we didn't get any errors, we're doing the same thing in the
`Attachable` concern because it's a good practice to close files after
we're done with them.
Also note we have to change the CKEditor Active Storage code so it's
compatible with Paperclip. In this case, I haven't been able to write a
test to confirm the attachment exists; I was getting the same
`ActiveStorage::IntegrityError` mentioned above.
Finally, we're updating the site customization image controller to use
`update` so the image and the attachment are updated within the same
transaction. This is also what we do in most controllers.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ_WNUytO9o
Having to wait for a whole page refresh after updating each setting was
painful when modifying several settings.
Even though the navigation is updated immediately to reflect which
sections have been enabled/disabled, there's one gotcha. Changing the
"SDG" setting will not update the user menu (which contains a link to
SDG content) nor the "SDG Configuration" tab; refreshing the page will
be necessary to check these changes. The same happens with the map and
remote census tabs. So in these cases we're making an exception and
sending the form. We might find a better solution in the future.
For this reason, we aren't using the `switch` ARIA role. Some users
might not expect a switch control to refresh the page, just like they
usually don't expect checkboxes to refresh the page. Furthermore, screen
reader support for the `switch` role seems to be inconsistent. For
instance, NVDA with Chrome announces the control as a checkbox instead
of a switch.
Note AJAX is only used for feature settings. Other settings are still
updated with regular HTTP requests.
Since we're now using AJAX requests, we have to make sure to add an
expectation in the homepage tests in order to make sure the request has
finished before starting a new one.
We're not adding the rule because it would apply the current line length
rule of 110 characters per line. We still haven't decided whether we'll
keep that rule or make lines shorter so they're easier to read,
particularly when vertically splitting the editor window.
So, for now, I'm applying the rule to lines which are about 90
characters long.
Since PostgreSQL doesn't guarantee the order of the records unless an
`ORDER BY` clause is used, the records sometimes had a different order.
This might cause records being present in more than one page.
One test was failing sometimes (when the record created first was
rendered after the record created last) because there seems to be a bug
in chrome/chromedriver 83 and later which causes links not to be clicked
when they're right at the edge of the screen (which was the case for the
notification appearing in the last place):
```
1) System Emails Preview Pending #moderate_pending
Failure/Error: click_on "Moderate notification send"
Selenium::WebDriver::Error::ElementNotInteractableError:
element not interactable: element has zero size
(Session info: headless chrome=91.0.4472.114)
```
- Allow to define a link (text and url) on budget form for render on the budget
header.
- Improve styles
Co-authored-by: Senén Rodero Rodríguez <senenrodero@gmail.com>
When users created a budget and made a typo, they could use the link to
go back to edit a budget. However, after doing so, they were out of the
budget creation process.
So we're now letting users go back to edit the budget, fix any mistakes
they might have made, and then continue to groups.
So now there's no need to edit each phase individually to enable/disable
them.
We aren't doing the same thing in the form to edit a budget because we
aren't sure about possible usability issues. On one hand, in some tables
we automatically update records when we mark a checkbox, so users might
expect that. On the other hand, having a checkbox in the middle of a
form which updates the database automatically is counter-intuitive,
particularly when right below that table there are other checkboxes
which don't update the database until the form is submitted.
So, either way, chances are users would think they've updated the phases
(or kept them intact) while the opposite would be true.
In the form within the wizard to create a budget that problem isn't that
important because there aren't any other fields in the form and it's
pretty intuitive that what users do will have no effect until they press
the "Finish" button.
Co-Authored-By: Julian Nicolas Herrero <microweb10@gmail.com>
Note we're keeping this section's original design (which had one button
to add a new group which after being pressed was replaced by a button to
cancel) but we aren't using Foundation's `data-toggle` because there
were a couple of usability and accessibility issues.
First, using `data-toggle` multiple times and applying it to multiple
elements led to the "cancel" button not being available after submitting
a form with errors. Fixing it made the code more complicated.
Second, the "Add new group" button always had the `aria-expanded`
attribute set to "true", so my screen reader was announcing the button
as expanded even when it wasn't. I didn't manage to fix it using
`data-toggle`.
Finally, after pressing either the "Add new group" and "Cancel" buttons,
the keyboard focus was lost since the elements disappeared.
So we're simplifying the HTML and adding some custom JavaScript to be
able to handle the focus and manually setting the `aria-expanded`
attribute.
Co-Authored-By: Javi Martín <javim@elretirao.net>
Co-Authored-By: Julian Herrero <microweb10@gmail.com>
Previously the draft mode was a phase of the PB, but that had some
limitations.
Now the phase drafting disappears and therefore the PB can have the
status published or not published (in draft mode).
That will give more flexibility in order to navigate through the
different phases and see how it looks for administrators before
publishing the PB and everybody can see.
By default, the PB is always created in draft mode, so it gives you
the flexibility to adjust and modify anything before publishing it.
This way we can simplify the code and don't have to rely on `.try`
statements which are confusing and so we don't allow them in the
`Rails/SafeNavigation` Rubocop rule.
We use a different logic to load the card depending on the controller
we're using, and then share the rest of the code. This way we simplify
the code a bit, since we don't have to check for the page_id parameter.
There are some sections where we are not reusing it:
* The budget investments search is completely different, so this
component isn't appropriate there
* Booth assignment and officers are slightly different, and I'm not
entirely sure it's safe to refactor these cases
After upgrading to Turbolinks 5, redirects are followed on AJAX
requests, so we were accidentally redirecting the user after they mark
an investment as visible to valuators.
There was already a system spec failing due to this issue ("Admin budget
investments Mark as visible to valuators Keeps the valuation tags");
however, it only failed in some cases, so we're adding additional tests.
Ideally we would write a system test to check what happens when users
click on the checkbox. However, from the user's point of view, nothing
happens when they do so, and so testing it is hard. There's a usability
issue here (no feedback is provided to the user indicating the
investment is actually updated when they click on the checkbox and so
they might look for a button to send the form), which also results in a
feature which is difficult to test.
So we're writing two tests instead: one checking the controller does not
redirect when using a JSON request, and one checking the form submits a
JSON request.
I've chosen JSON over AJAX because usually requests to the update action
come from the edit form, and we might change the edit form to send an
AJAX request (and, in this case, Turbolinks would handle the redirect as
mentioned above).
Another option would be to send an AJAX request to a different action,
like it's done for the toggle selection action. I don't have a strong
preference for either option, so I'm leaving it the way it was. At some
point we should change the user interface, though; right now in the same
row there are two actions doing basically the same thing (toggling
valuator visibility and toggling selection) but with very different user
interfaces (one is a checkbox and the other one a link changing its
style depending on the state), resulting in a confusing interface.
We removed it in commit d639cd58 because it recommended using `uniq`
where `distinct` was more appropriate. This has been fixed in
rubocop-rails 2.6.0.
We can find the booth through the booth assignment, so we don't need to
pass it in the URL.
Since the parameter is in the URL and not sent through a form, we can
also use `params[:poll_id]` directly, and so we can reuse the
`load_poll` method.
