While having a pattern when you have no example doesn't make a lot of
sense, it's a problem that you can't delete the example after deleting
the pattern: you previously had to remove the example before the
pattern.
This PR fixes that by always allowing you to update the example, even if
there is no pattern. Our server doesn't currently accept submitting an
example with no pattern, but we could allow that if we want to (and
probably just discard it on the back-end).
This PR also updates the validation of the example and the regex. There
were more unhandled edge cases previously where the validation would
disappear or be wrong. This should be fixed now. The new logic is that,
whenever you update the either the pattern or the example, we check:
- if you have an error in your pattern, no pattern, or no example, then
delete the example error if it exists
- have a well-formed pattern and an example then check if the example
matches the pattern and add/delete an error accordingly
This does have some consequences: editing the pattern can render your
example invalid. You'll also get immediate feedback instead of when you
switch focus. I think this is often a bad pattern (giving the user too
much negative feedback), but in terms of working with regexes, I think
it might be a good thing. We also give immediate feedback today, so I
don't think this is a regression.
Any thoughts are welcome.
Since `auth/{auth_type}/settings` is an Enterprise route, this prevents
404s when we try to use the hook to fetch auth settings in
non-Enterprise instances by using the conditional `useEnterpriseSWR`
hook.
The error message only tells the user that the name doesn't match the
pattern. Because we already show the pattern above the input, we don't
need to repeat it in the error message. This makes for a shorter and
more concise message and better UX.
At the same time, for API users, we can keep the more detailed message
that includes info about the pattern, the example, and the description.
This change makes it so that you can save flag naming data on project
creation.
There was a mismatch between flattened and nested data in the creation
endpoint. Likely because we went back and forth a bit when we created
the feature originally.
This PR adds a feature naming pattern description to the project form.
It's rendered as a multi-line input field. The description is also
stored in the db.
This adapts most of @andreas-unleash's PR #4599 with some minor changes
(using description instead of prompt). Actually displaying this data to
the users will come in a later PR.
Bumps [@adobe/css-tools](https://github.com/adobe/css-tools) from 4.0.2
to 4.3.1.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/adobe/css-tools/blob/main/History.md"><code>@adobe/css-tools</code>'s
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h1>4.3.1 / 2023-03-14</h1>
<ul>
<li>Fix redos vulnerability with specific crafted css string -
CVE-2023-26364</li>
</ul>
<h1>4.3.0 / 2023-03-07</h1>
<ul>
<li>Update build tools</li>
<li>Update exports path and files</li>
</ul>
<h1>4.2.0 / 2023-02-21</h1>
<ul>
<li>Add <a
href="https://github.com/container"><code>@container</code></a>
support</li>
<li>Add <a href="https://github.com/layer"><code>@layer</code></a>
support</li>
</ul>
<h1>4.1.0 / 2023-01-25</h1>
<ul>
<li>Support ESM Modules</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/adobe/css-tools/commits">compare view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot merge` will merge this PR after your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot squash and merge` will squash and merge this PR after
your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot cancel merge` will cancel a previously requested merge
and block automerging
- `@dependabot reopen` will reopen this PR if it is closed
- `@dependabot close` will close this PR and stop Dependabot recreating
it. You can achieve the same result by closing it manually
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)
You can disable automated security fix PRs for this repo from the
[Security Alerts
page](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/network/alerts).
</details>
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Does what it says on the tin, should help with cleaning up
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/4512 and respective schema
changes.
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
When archiving or reviving feature toggles, when toggles disappear from
table, actions bar should also disappear.
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-1293/bulk-revive-modal-doesnt-go-away
## About the changes
We found a problem generating the Go SDK client for the tokens API that
makes use of `oneOf`, combined with `allOf`. The generator doesn't know
how to map this type and leaves it as an object. This PR simplifies the spec and therefore the code generated after it
Adds a first iteration of feature flag naming patterns. Currently behind a flag.
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
Adds troubleshooting guides for some common problems under the how-to
area (following the [diataxis framework](https://diataxis.fr/)).
This is part of Unleash 2023 offsite challenge
---------
Co-authored-by: Drew Gorton <drew.gorton@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: Diego Susa <diego@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: Michael Vittiglio <michael.vittiglio@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
This change sorts the tags in the tags file and tests that the list is
sorted alphabetically. This makes it easier to
find tags in the file.
#4580 already introduced a test to check that we have no duplicate
tags, so this isn't as necessary anymore, but it's still nice to have.
It also removes the previous auto-sorting before exporting. This is to
ensure that entries are sorted in the source list. This might seem like
a regression, but it makes it easier to spot near-duplicate tags:
> Despite having the test that validates there are no duplicates, you
can always have Notifications and Notification API by mistake (tags that
mean the same but are different). Keeping the list alphabetically sorted
might help to prevent this before pushing the change to prod. In this
case, we will eventually find out and fix it, so this could be a good
reason to have the list sorted.
## About the changes
Returns Not Found on create and get project api tokens when given a
project id that doesn't exist
## Discussion points
- This is an extra lookup per execution of the endpoint
## About the changes
At https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/4432 we've introduced the
same tags twice which causes issues when generating the api clients.
Closes #2-1350-fix-openapi-duplicated-tags
## About the changes
Returns either 400 or 404 when token isn't found or doesn't match single
project must be provided projectId criteria
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
Linear 2-1003
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
Is projects.length > 1 a 400?
This PR fixes a bug reported from a customer where deleting a legal
value that was used in a strategy constraint would make it impossible to
edit the constraint.
[The bug was introduced
here](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/4473)
The core of the problem introduced was that the values used to calculate
illegal values was based on changing state. On the first render it would
display correct state as it would match the legal values coming from the
context definition with the legal values currently used in the
constraint as values. However, when you triggered the onClick method for
the checkboxes the state would be changed because we would remove the
illegal values from the valueset and only insert current legal values in
the state. This would trigger a re-render of the component, and now the
data used to identify the illegal values would no longer be correct,
because the bad values had been cleaned from the state. This would cause
the UI for constraints to display incorrectly.
Changed the flow to now give you a warning if you have illegal values,
and that if you make changes and save the strategy these values will be
removed from the constraint:
<img width="726" alt="Skjermbilde 2023-08-25 kl 08 56 02"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/16081982/78e9875d-d864-4e21-bfb7-a530247a07eb">
Also amended this to apply to the single legal value constraints.
<img width="721" alt="Skjermbilde 2023-08-25 kl 08 57 40"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/16081982/237a11d0-5c05-445c-9e99-b79cab0bff94">
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1128/change-the-api-to-support-adding-multiple-roles-to-a-usergroup-on-ahttps://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1125/be-able-to-fetch-all-roles-for-a-user-in-a-projecthttps://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1127/adapt-the-ui-to-be-able-to-do-a-multi-select-on-role-permissions-for
- Allows assigning project roles to groups with root roles
- Implements new methods that support assigning, editing, removing and
retrieving multiple project roles in project access, along with other
auxiliary methods
- Adds new events for updating and removing assigned roles
- Adapts `useProjectApi` to new methods that use new endpoints that
support multiple roles
- Adds the `multipleRoles` feature flag that controls the possibility of
selecting multiple roles on the UI
- Adapts `ProjectAccessAssign` to support multiple role, using the new
methods
- Adds a new `MultipleRoleSelect` component that allows you to select
multiple roles based on the `RoleSelect` component
- Adapts the `RoleCell` component to support either a single role or
multiple roles
- Updates the `access.spec.ts` Cypress e2e test to reflect our new logic
- Updates `access-service.e2e.test.ts` with tests covering the multiple
roles logic and covering some corner cases
- Updates `project-service.e2e.test.ts` to adapt to the new logic,
adding a test that covers adding access with `[roles], [groups],
[users]`
- Misc refactors and boy scouting
---------
Co-authored-by: David Leek <david@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: Mateusz Kwasniewski <kwasniewski.mateusz@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
