This PR changes the behavior of the API a little bit. Instead of
removing any strategies from `changeRequestStrategies` that are also
in `strategies`, we keep them in instead.
The reason for this is that the overview of where a segment is used is
incomplete if it shows only strategies but not CRs. Imagine this:
You want to delete a segment, but you're told it's only used in strategy
S.
So you go and remove it from strategy S, but then you're told it's
suddenly used in CRs A, B, and C. This is now a two-step operation
with a bad surprise. Instead, we could show you immediately that this
segment is used in strategy S and CRs A, B, and C.
Otherwise, we might accidentally display CR data to open source users.
But more importantly, it might keep them from being able to delete a
segment that's in use by a CR in their database that they can't touch.
So by checking that they're on an enterprise instance, we avoid this
potential blocker.
I've added the `includeChangeRequestUsageData` parameter as a boolean
now, but I'm open to other suggestions.
This PR changes the payload of the strategiesBySegment endpoint when the
flag is active. In addition to returning just the strategies, the object
will also contain a new property, called `changeRequestStrategies`
containing the strategies that are used in change requests.
This PR does not update the schema. That can be done later when the
changes go into beta. This also allows us some time to iterate on the
payload without changing the public API.
## Discussion points:
Should `strategies` and `changeRequestStrategies` ever contain
duplicates? Take this scenario:
- Strategy S uses segment T.
- There is an open change request that updates the list of segments for
S to T and a new segment U.
- In this case, strategy S would show up both in `strategies` _and_ in
`changeRequestStrategies`.
We have two options:
1. Filter the list of change request strategies, so that they don't
contain any duplicates (this is currently how it's implemented)
2. Ignore the duplicates and just send both lists as is.
We're doing option 2 for now.
Removing a user from a project was impossible if you only had 1 owner.
It worked fine when having more than an owner. This should fix it and
we'll add tests later
## PR Description
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1645/address-post-mortem-action-point-all-flags-should-be-runtime
Refactor with the goal of ensuring that flags are runtime controllable,
mostly focused on the current scheduler logic.
This includes the following changes:
- Moves scheduler into its own "scheduler" feature folder
- Reverts dependency: SchedulerService takes in the MaintenanceService,
not the other way around
- Scheduler now evaluates maintenance mode at runtime instead of relying
only on its mode state (active / paused)
- Favors flag checks to happen inside the scheduled methods, instead of
controlling whether the method is scheduled at all (favor runtime over
startup)
- Moves "account last seen update" to scheduler
- Updates tests accordingly
- Boyscouting
Here's a manual test showing this behavior, where my local instance was
controlled by a remote instance. Whenever I toggle `maintenanceMode`
through a flag remotely, my scheduled functions stop running:
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/14320932/ae0a7fa9-5165-4c0b-9b0b-53b9fb20de72
Had a look through all of our current flags and it *seems to me* that
they are all used in a runtime controllable way, but would still feel
more comfortable if this was double checked, since it can be complex to
ensure this.
The only exception to this was `migrationLock`, which I believe is OK,
since the migration only happens at the start anyways.
## Discussion / Questions
~~Scheduler `mode` (active / paused) is currently not *really* being
used, along with its respective methods, except in tests. I think this
could be a potential footgun. Should we remove it in favor of only
controlling the scheduler state through maintenance mode?~~ Addressed in
7c52e3f638
~~The config property `disableScheduler` is still a startup
configuration, but perhaps that makes sense to leave as is?~~
[Answered](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/5363#issuecomment-1819005445)
by @FredrikOseberg, leaving as is.
Are there any other tests we should add?
Is there anything I missed?
Identified some `setInterval` and `setTimeout` that may make sense to
leave as is instead of moving over to the scheduler service:
- ~~`src/lib/metrics` - This is currently considered a `MetricsMonitor`.
Should this be refactored to a service instead and adapt these
setIntervals to use the scheduler instead? Is there anything special
with this we need to take into account? @chriswk @ivarconr~~
[Answered](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/5363#issuecomment-1820501511)
by @ivarconr, leaving as is.
- ~~`src/lib/proxy/proxy-repository.ts` - This seems to have a complex
and specific logic currently. Perhaps we should leave it alone for now?
@FredrikOseberg~~
[Answered](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/5363#issuecomment-1819005445)
by @FredrikOseberg, leaving as is.
- `src/lib/services/user-service.ts` - This one also seems to be a bit
more specific, where we generate new timeouts for each receiver id.
Might not belong in the scheduler service. @Tymek
This PR hooks up the changes introduced in #5301 to the API and puts
them behind a feature flag. A new test has been added and the test setup
has been slightly tweaked to allow this test.
When the flag is enabled, the API will now not let you delete a segment
that's used in any active CRs.
Switch the express-openapi implementation from our internal fork to the
upstream version. We have upstreamed our changes and a new version has
been released, so this should be the last step before we can retire our
fork.
Because some of the dependencies have been updated since our internal
fork, we also need to update some of our error handling to reflect this.
Expose new interface while also getting rid of unneeded compiler ignores
None of the changes should add new security risks, despite this report:
> Code scanning results / CodeQL Failing after 4s — 2 new alerts
including 2 high severity security vulnerabilities
Not sure what that means, maybe a removed ignore...
Sort the items before inserting them into the database in order to
reduce the chance of deadlocks happening when multiple pods are
inserting at the same time.
This PR adds a cleanup job that removes unknown feature flags from
last_seen_at_metrics table every 24 hours since we no longer have a
foreign key on the name column in the features table.
## About the changes
This fixes a bug updating a project, when optional data
(defaultStickiness and featureLimit are not part of the payload).
The problem happens due to:
1. ProjectController does not use the type: UpdateProjectSchema for the
request body (will be addressed in another PR in unleash-enterprise)
2. Project Store interface does not match UpdateProjectSchema (but it
relies on accepting `additional properties: true`, which is what we
agreed on for input)
3. Feature limit is not defined in UpdateProjectSchema (also addressed
in the other PR)
## About the changes
This makes sure that projects have at least one owner, either a group or
a user. This is to prevent accidentally losing access to a project.
We check this when removing a user/group or when changing the role of a
user/group
**Note**: We can still leave a group empty as the only owner of the
project, but that's okay because we can still add more users to the
group
Sort array items before running compare. Feature flag certain properties
of strategy that were previously not present in the /api/admin/features
endpoint.
This PR is the first step in separating the client and admin stores.
Currently our feature toggle services uses the client store to serve
multiple purposes.
Admin API uses the feature toggle service to serve both the feature
toggle list and playground features, while the client API uses the
feature toggle service to serve client features. The admin API can
change often and have very different requirements than the client API,
which changes infrequently and generally keeps the same stable structure
for long periods of time. This architecture is error prone, because when
you need to make changes to the admin API, you can very easily affect
the client API.
I aim to put up a stone wall between the two APIs. Complete separation
between the two APIs, at the cost of some duplication.
In this PR I have created a feature oriented architecture for client
features and disconnected the client API from the feature toggle
service. It now goes through it's own service to it's own store. For
feature toggle service I have duplicated and replaced the functionality
that serves /api/admin/features, I have kept a lot of the ugliness in
the code and haven't removed anything in order to avoid breaking
changes.
Next steps:
* Move playground to admin API
* Remove client-feature-toggle-store from feature-toggle-service
## About the changes
This splits the interfaces for import and export, especially because the
import functionality has to be replaced in enterprise repo.
This is a breaking change because of the service renames, but I'll have
the PR for the other repository ready so we reduce the time to fix. I
intentionally avoided doing it backward compatible because of time.
As part of more telemetry on the usage of Unleash.
This PR adds a new `stat_` prefixed table as well as a trigger on the
events table trigger on each insert to increment a counter per
environment per day.
The trigger will trigger on every insert into the events base, but will
filter and only increment the counter for events that actually have the
environment set. (there are events, like user-created, that does not
relate to a specific environment).
Bit wary on this, but since we truncate down to row per (day,
environment) combo, finding conflict and incrementing shouldn't take too
long here.
@ivarconr was it something like this you were considering?
This PR cleans up and refactors the feature-strategy-store method
getFeatureOverview to join on the new table and attempts to make the
function more readable by extracting some of the logic into separate
functions. Keeping the LastSeenMapper for now in case there is a reason
to use it for the other endpoints.
## About the changes
Segment changes in predata and data columns were both showing the new
segments list
Adds formatting of what's changed with segments to feature strategy
update events, so when a user changes the strategy from using
constraints, to using segments instead, it's communicated in event
updates
results in:
admin updated
[sample-toggle](http://localhost/projects/default/features/sample-toggle)
in project [default](http://localhost/projects/default) by updating
strategy Sample Strategy in development constraints from [userId is one
of (1,2,3)] to empty set of constraints; segments from empty set of
segments to (1)
Closes #
#4912
### Important files
- `src/lib/services/feature-toggle-service.ts` - Segment changes in
preData and data
- `src/lib/addons/feature-event-formatter-md.ts` - Formatting segments
## Discussion points
This is an SR least effort PR - we should plan a task where we look at
how to render this list of segments in a more comprehensible way (it's
just rendering ids now)
## About the changes
This transactional implementation decorates a service with a
transactional method that removes the need to start transactions in the
method using the service.
This is a gradual rollout with a feature toggle, just because
transactions are not easy.
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1253/add-support-for-more-events-in-the-slack-app-integration
Adds support for a lot more events in our integrations. Here is how the
full list looks like:
- ADDON_CONFIG_CREATED
- ADDON_CONFIG_DELETED
- ADDON_CONFIG_UPDATED
- API_TOKEN_CREATED
- API_TOKEN_DELETED
- CHANGE_ADDED
- CHANGE_DISCARDED
- CHANGE_EDITED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_APPLIED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_APPROVAL_ADDED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_APPROVED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_CANCELLED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_CREATED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_DISCARDED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_REJECTED
- CHANGE_REQUEST_SENT_TO_REVIEW
- CONTEXT_FIELD_CREATED
- CONTEXT_FIELD_DELETED
- CONTEXT_FIELD_UPDATED
- FEATURE_ARCHIVED
- FEATURE_CREATED
- FEATURE_DELETED
- FEATURE_ENVIRONMENT_DISABLED
- FEATURE_ENVIRONMENT_ENABLED
- FEATURE_ENVIRONMENT_VARIANTS_UPDATED
- FEATURE_METADATA_UPDATED
- FEATURE_POTENTIALLY_STALE_ON
- FEATURE_PROJECT_CHANGE
- FEATURE_REVIVED
- FEATURE_STALE_OFF
- FEATURE_STALE_ON
- FEATURE_STRATEGY_ADD
- FEATURE_STRATEGY_REMOVE
- FEATURE_STRATEGY_UPDATE
- FEATURE_TAGGED
- FEATURE_UNTAGGED
- GROUP_CREATED
- GROUP_DELETED
- GROUP_UPDATED
- PROJECT_CREATED
- PROJECT_DELETED
- SEGMENT_CREATED
- SEGMENT_DELETED
- SEGMENT_UPDATED
- SERVICE_ACCOUNT_CREATED
- SERVICE_ACCOUNT_DELETED
- SERVICE_ACCOUNT_UPDATED
- USER_CREATED
- USER_DELETED
- USER_UPDATED
I added the events that I thought were relevant based on my own
discretion. Know of any event we should add? Let me know and I'll add it
🙂
For now I only added these events to the new Slack App integration, but
we can add them to the other integrations as well since they are now
supported.
The event formatter was refactored and changed quite a bit in order to
make it easier to maintain and add new events in the future. As a
result, events are now posted with different text. Do we consider this a
breaking change? If so, I can keep the old event formatter around,
create a new one and only use it for the new Slack App integration.
I noticed we don't have good 404 behaviors in the UI for things that are
deleted in the meantime, that's why I avoided some links to specific
resources (like feature strategies, integration configurations, etc),
but we could add them later if we improve this.
This PR also tries to add some consistency to the the way we log events.
This commit changes our linter/formatter to biome (https://biomejs.dev/)
Causing our prehook to run almost instantly, and our "yarn lint" task to
run in sub 100ms.
Some trade-offs:
* Biome isn't quite as well established as ESLint
* Are we ready to install a different vscode plugin (the biome plugin)
instead of the prettier plugin
The configuration set for biome also has a set of recommended rules,
this is turned on by default, in order to get to something that was
mergeable I have turned off a couple the rules we seemed to violate the
most, that we also explicitly told eslint to ignore.
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1403/consider-refactoring-the-way-tags-are-fetched-for-the-events
This adds 2 methods to `EventService`:
- `storeEvent`;
- `storeEvents`;
This allows us to run event-specific logic inside these methods. In the
case of this PR, this means fetching the feature tags in case the event
contains a `featureName` and there are no tags specified in the event.
This prevents us from having to remember to fetch the tags in order to
store feature-related events except for very specific cases, like the
deletion of a feature - You can't fetch tags for a feature that no
longer exists, so in that case we need to pre-fetch the tags before
deleting the feature.
This also allows us to do any event-specific post-processing to the
event before reaching the DB layer.
In general I think it's also nicer that we reference the event service
instead of the event store directly.
There's a lot of changes and a lot of files touched, but most of it is
boilerplate to inject the `eventService` where needed instead of using
the `eventStore` directly.
Hopefully this will be a better approach than
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/4729
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
## About the changes
This enables us to use names instead of permission ids across all our
APIs at the computational cost of searching for the ids in the DB but
improving the API user experience
## Open topics
We're using methods that are test-only and circumvent our business
logic. This makes our test to rely on assumptions that are not always
true because these assumptions are not validated frequently.
i.e. We are expecting that after removing a permission it's no longer
there, but to test this, the permission has to be there before:
78273e4ff3/src/test/e2e/services/access-service.e2e.test.ts (L367-L375)
But it seems that's not the case.
We'll look into improving this later.
## About the changes
- `getActiveUsers` is using multiple stores, so it is refactored into
read-model
- Refactored Instance stats service into `features` to co-locate related
code
Closes https://linear.app/unleash/issue/UNL-230/active-users-prometheus
### Important files
`src/lib/features/instance-stats/getActiveUsers.ts`
## Discussion points
`getActiveUsers` is coded less _class-based_ then previous similar
read-models. In one file instead of 3 (read-model interface, fake read
model, sql read model). I find types and functions way more readable,
but I'm ready to refactor it to interfaces and classes if consistency is
more important.
This PR makes it so that adding a feature naming description when there
is no pattern is disallowed. It also changes the validation for feature
naming slightly so that it can return multiple errors at once.
This PR updates the back-end handling of feature naming patterns to add
implicit leading `^`s and trailing `$`s to the regexes when comparing
them.
It also adds tests for the new behavior, both for new flag names and for
examples.
## Discussion points
Regarding stripping incoming ^ and $: We don't actually need to strip
incoming `^`s and `$`s: it appears that `^^^^^x$$$$$` is just as valid
as `^x$`. As such, we can leave that in. However, if we think it's
better to strip, we can do that too.
Second, I'm considering moving the flag naming validation into a
dedicated module to encapsulate everything a little better. Not sure if
this is the time or where it would live, but open to hearing
suggestions.
This PR adds feature name pattern validation to the import validation
step. When errors occur, they are rendered with all the offending
features, the pattern to match, plus the pattern's description and
example if available.
To achieve this I've added an extra method to the feature toggle service
that checks feature names without throwing errors (because catching `n`
async errors in a loop became tricky and hard to grasp). This method is
also reused in the existing feature name validation method and handles
the feature enabled chcek.
In doing so, I've also added tests to check that the pattern is applied.
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 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.
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>
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>
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>
