Since Bundler 2.4.19, including in Ruby 3.2.3, it's possible to define
the Ruby version in the Gemfile by indicating which file contains the
version [1].
There are at least two practical cases where this is an advantage.
First, people using RVM in development will no longer accidentally run
the application using the wrong Ruby version (which, before these
changes, might happen if they switch to a branch using a different Ruby
version and forget to run `rvm use` or exit the current folder and enter
it again) because they will get an error when trying to do so.
Second, people using services like Heroku no longer need to modify the
Gemfile.
The disadvantage is that, now, every time we update the Ruby version, we
have to remember to run `bundle` so our `Gemfile.lock` gets the new
version.
[1] https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/releases/tag/bundler-v2.4.19
Note that, while we're no longer including them as part of the
`execute_release_2.2.0_tasks` task, we're keeping the tasks to remove
duplicate poll voters and poll options just in case there are some
unexpected issues when adding a unique database index while upgrading to
version 2.3.0. We'll remove them in version 2.4.0.
This code was added in commit b3f570512 in order to rotate existing
cookies used by Consul Democracy 2.1 and earlier. Since the code was
included in Consul Democracy 2.2, existing installation using Consul
Democracy 2.2 will have already rotated the old cookies, which means we
don't need the cookie rotator anymore.
With this change, on my browser, reloading a page in development after
changing a CSS file is about 25% faster than simply splitting the CSS
code between `application.css` and `vendored.css`. Compared to using
only one `application.css` file containing everything, reloading a page
in development is about 35% faster.
The combined size of all the generated stylesheets is now about 0.5%
bigger. Not sure why (maybe placeholder selectors?), but the difference
is negligible.
Note that we could load the `administration.css` file only in the admin
area, reducing the size of the page for people accessing the public
area. However, the size of this stylesheet (compressed) is 28K, which is
less than 3% of the overall size of a page and, on the other hand,
there's a risk of some styles no longer being applied because we might
have overlooked the fact that some styles in the `administration.css`
are also applied to the public area.
So, for now, we're still loading the administration styles in the public
area. We might reconsider in the future.
With this change, on my browser, reloading a page in development after
changing a CSS file is about 10%-15% faster.
On the minus side, this change results in an extra request when browsing
the page; AFAIK it isn't that big of a deal, even when the server isn't
using HTTP/2.
These styles are used in places other than the admin section. In
particular, the `.button.small.success` style is no longer used in the
admin section but only in the verified user form.
Note: I'm not sure whether the `table .callout` selector matches any
element, either in the admin or in the public section, so I'm leaving it
where it was.
It was only used once, and we can use a selector that makes it obvious
where it is used. Besides, the style for the no-margin-bottom class was
to remove the bottom margin, which was inconsistent with the style for
the no-margin-top class, which adds a negative margin to the element.
I'm not sure why we're removing the margin here, though, since it isn't
consistent with the rest of the forms in the application. For now, we're
keeping it the way it used to look.
* The `archived` class isn't used since commit cd982768f
* The `ignored` class isn't used since commit 343025872
* The `count-error` class isn't used since commit bddfee2b8
* The `edit-legislation-draft-version`, `edit-legislation-process` and
`legislation-questions-answers` classes aren't used since commit
d679c1eb7
* The `legislation-process-save`, `legislation-question-delete`,
`legislation-process-version` and `legislation-process-question`
classes aren't used since commit f8707a73cd
* The `is-featured` class isn't used since e60ffa3c0
* The `on-hover` and `on-hover-block` classes aren't used since commit
d91388b2b
* The `total-price` class isn't used since commit d0b8fef6b
* The `login-as` class was never used in the first place
According to the GeoJSON specification [1]:
> * A linear ring is a closed LineString with four or more positions.
> * The first and last positions are equivalent, and they MUST contain
> identical values; their representation SHOULD also be identical.
> (...)
> * For type "Polygon", the "coordinates" member MUST be an array of
> linear ring coordinate arrays.
Note that, for simplicity, right now we aren't checking whether the
coordinates are defined counterclockwise for exterior rings and
clockwise for interior rings, which is what the specification expects.
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7946#section-3.1.6
Note we're adding a `name` property to the geozones investments sidebar
map even if we don't render the geozones in the map, in order to
simplify the JavaScript function `geozoneLayers`.
We're reworking the format validation to correctly interpret feature
collection, feature, and geometry, according to RFC 7946 [1].
Since Leaflet interprets GeoJSON format, we're rendering the GeoJSON as
a layer instead of as a set of points. For that, we're normalizing the
GeoJSON to make sure it contains either a Feature or a
FeatureCollection. We're also adding the Leaflet images to the assets
path so the markers used for point geometries are rendered correctly.
Note we no longer allow a GeoJSON containing a geometry but not a
defined type. Since there might be invalid GeoJSON in existing Consul
Democracy databases, we're normalizing these existing geometry objects
to be part of a feature object.
We're also wrapping the outline points in a FeatureCollection object
because most of the large GIS systems eg ArcGIS, QGIS export geojson as
a complete FeatureCollection.
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7946
Co-authored-by: Javi Martín <javim@elretirao.net>
The `show_caption_for?` method was used to determine whether to check for the
presence of a `figcaption` element, but its only purpose was to skip the check
when the factory was `:budget.
The reason we skip the `figcaption` check for `:budget` is that it is the only case
where the test is verifying the form's edit page, where displaying a `figcaption` does
not make sense.
This method was removed as its logic was redundant or unnecessary:
- For "Proposal" new:
After creating a proposal, we are redirected to the "created" page, where the text
"Not now, go to my proposal" is not present, leading to a constant
`rescue Capybara::ElementNotFound`.
Instead, the "created" page shows a preview of how the proposal will look when
published and a link saying "No, I want to publish the proposal". Since the click's
purpose was to navigate to the proposal's "show" page, and this can already be
verified on the "created" page, no additional handling is needed for this case.
- For "Proposal" edit:
After updating the proposal, we are directly redirected to the proposal's "show" page,
so no click_link logic is necessary here either.
- For "Budget":
The redirection is now handled directly with:
`visit edit_admin_budget_path(imageable) if factory == :budget`.
In the imageable_attach_new_file method used in this tests the:
> expect(page).to have_css ".loading-bar.errors"
is already being checked.
Therefore, to leave only the line:
> imageable_attach_new_file(file_fixture("logo_header.png"), false)
in the test, since there is another test that verifies it,
I think we can remove the test altogether.
In the imageable_attach_new_file method used in these tests the:
> expect(page).to have_css ".loading-bar.complete"
is already being checked, so there is no need to verify it twice.
This is the only it_behaves_like "nested imageable" call where the has_many_images parameter is set to true.
Previously, the shared example skipped or altered expectations based on this parameter. Now, this behavior is
moved to the factory level (:future_poll_question_option).
Since this is an administrative section, a related administrator is created for the user.
