We were getting some deprecation warnings:
DEPRECATION WARNING: `Module#parent` has been renamed to
`module_parent`. `parent` is deprecated and will be removed in Rails
6.1.
DEPRECATION WARNING: `Module#parents` has been renamed to
`module_parents`. `parents` is deprecated and will be removed in Rails
6.1.
Apply new structure in the section that shows the comments icon together
with the number of comments so that it is easier to unify them into one
component.
Please note that we updated the comment-number class to comments-count
in order to simplify the css in the new component in the next commit.
Remove unnecessary span class "debate-comments".
We take advantage of this commit to also unify the format of the date
that appears next to the comments with the rest of the application. The
format that we removed is being used on the same page in the
"Participation phases" tab (I guess that was the reason for putting it
the same) but I think it makes more sense to use the date format that is
used in this kind section in the rest of the application.
Apply new structure in the section that shows the comments icon together
with the number of comments so that it is easier to unify them into one
component.
In this case we make only the text clickable and not the icon as in the
rest of the application. We're keeping the color and text-decoration so
it looks the same way it has looked until now, but we might change it
in the future.
Apparently the dashboard branch wasn't updated after we extracted a
common head for all layouts in commit 6e4f697ce, so when said branch was
merged we reintroduced the duplication. Furthermore, we forgot to add to
the dashboard layout the changes we were applying to the common head
partial.
In the mail section we have very different indentations and formatting in
texts with sanitize, links and texts with interpolations. In my opinion it
helps a lot to have clearer indentations in these cases.
This may not be the best way to indent them, but at least I think it is
clearer than it was and at least relatively unified.
The notification digest title did not look the same as other mail. We
removed the table for the title to make it more consistent with the rest of
the emails.
We had the same texts four times, with slight variations in the case of
the management section.
We're unifying them under the "verification" i18n namespace, since the
texts are about actions which can be done depending on whether users are
verified or not.
Note the names of the i18n keys aren't very consistent, since we use
"debates" in plural but "proposal" in singular. We're leaving it like
this so existing translations aren't affected.
We were saying that actions marked with an asterisk were only possible
when users were verified. However, there were no actions marked with an
asterisk; instead, we didn't show these actions to non-verified users.
Besides, the concept of Census doesn't exist in many CONSUL
installations, where verification is done through other means, so the
text saying that only users on Census could do certain things wasn't
correct in these cases.
Due to that, we're removing the asterisk in the Spanish version as well.
We're also removing the asterisk in the default welcome pages, since
we're already saying which action can't be done until the account is
verified.
In the case of the residence verification page, we had asterisks but we
didn't explain what the asterisk stood for, so we're also removing it.
We had a link to `/census_terms`, and by looking at the code, it wasn't
so clear where this URL came from.
Using `page_path`, it's easier to understand that it comes from a page
with the `census_term` slug. It also means we'll find this line when
searching for usages of `page_path` in the code.
Currently the application does not send any email to confirm the
account for already confirmed users. But we show a notice message
that may look like you will recive one:
"If your email address exists in our database, you will receive
an email with instructions for how to confirm your email address
in a few minutes."
In this commit we keep the original message, but send an email to
the user informing them that their account is now registered.
This way no one can know if someone else's account is confirmed and
we don't have to worry about GDPR either.
Co-Authored-By: taitus <sebastia.roig@gmail.com>
Currently we were using the wizard component to edit a
phase when we were no longer in the wizard.
This was a bit strange, as it took us out of the context
and showed us information such as the
CreationTimelineComponent or the HelpComponent
that is meant for when navigating the Wizard.
We were showing the header when there were no search terms but there
were advanced search filters, unlike what we do for debates and
proposals. Besides, we were already hiding the header when there were
search terms, so it makes sense to hide it when using the advanced
search too.
We're using the `@search_terms` and `@advanced_search_terms` instance
variables in order to be consistent with what we do in the debates and
proposals sections.
In commit f374478dd, we enabled the possibility to use HTML in the
search results translations in order to add a <strong> tag to these
results. However, that meant we were also allowing HTML tags inside the
search term itself, and so it was possible to inject HTML on the page.
Stripping the HTML tags solves the issue.
Note the issue wasn't a high severity issue because tags such as
`<script>` weren't allowed since we were using the `sanitize` helper.
We were using very similar code for proposals, debates and investments,
so we might as well share the code between them.
Note we're using the `proposals.index.search_results` key even for
debates and investments. This will still work because the translations
shared the same text, but IMHO we should rename the key to something
like `shared.search_results_summary`. We aren't doing so because we'd
lose all the existing translations.
The background wasn't expanding to the edge of the page because we
forgot to do this when we did the same thing for proposals and debates
in commit 4c47eab60.
When using the advanced search in the debates and proposals sections, we
were not displaying the search term in the search results summary.
However, we were displaying it when using the advanced search in the
investments section.
Now we're doing the same thing everywhere.
Since we were creating a new answer in the form, we weren't getting the
errors associated to the answer the administrator was trying to create,
and so we were skipping the test.
Using the answer which contains the information about validation errors
fixes the issue and so we don't have to skip the tests.
The map feature was never implemented for debates (only for proposals
and budget investments) and it was crashing for debates because the page
didn't load the geozones. And we don't have a "geozone" field in the
debates form either.
So we're removing the map page alongside its (pending implementation)
tests.
