This PR does **one** thing:
it changes the events for potentially stale to:
- Only being emitted when potentially stale gets turned on
- In doing so, it also simplifies the event that's getting emitted,
removing the `data` property.
- The event is also renamed to better match the existing
`feature-stale-on` and `...-off` events.
The addon listening was broken out into a separate PR (#4279)
## Old description
This change lets all addons listen for events when features get marked
or unmarked as potentially stale.
### Discussion
#### All addons?
Should this be available to all addons? I can't see a reason why it
shouldn't be available to all addons, but I might be missing
something.
**Update**: spoke to a couple people. Can see no reason why this isn't
okay.
#### Should it be behind a flag?
The feature is still behind a flag, but the event type is not. Should
we gate the event being available until we actually emit the event?
That would require some more code, but could yield less potential
confusion.
Open to hearing your thoughts.
This PR updates the feature type service by adding a new
`updateLifetime` method. This method handles the connection between the
API (#4256) and the store (#4252).
I've also added some new e2e tests to ensure that the API behaves as
expected.
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
When reordering strategies for a feature environment:
- Adds stop when CR are enabled
- Emits an event
## 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
This PR adds updates the potentially stale status change events whenever
the potentially stale update function is run.
No events are emitted yet. While the emission is only a few lines of
code, I'd like to do that in a separate PR so that we can give it the
attention it deserves in the form of tests, etc.
This PR also moves the potentially stale update functionality from the
`update` method to only being done in the
`updatePotentiallyStaleFeatures` method. This keeps all functionality
related to marking `potentiallyStale` in one place.
The emission implementation was removed in
4fb7cbde03
## The update queries
While it would be possible to do the state updates in a single query
instead of three separate ones, wrangling this into knex proved to be
troublesome (and would also probably be harder to understand and reason
about). The current solution uses three smaller queries (one select, two
updates), as Jaanus suggested in a private slack thread.
This reverts commit 16e3799b9a.
<!-- 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
<!-- 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? -->
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1232/implement-first-iteration-of-the-new-slack-app-addon
This PR implements the first iteration of the new Slack App addon.
Unlike the old Slack addon, this one uses a Slack App (bot) that is
installed to Slack workspaces in order to post messages. This uses
`@slack/web-api`, which internally uses the latest Slack API endpoints
like `postMessage`.
This is currently behind a flag: `slackAppAddon`.
The current flow is that the Unleash Slack App is installed from
whatever source:
- Unleash addons page;
- Direct link;
- https://unleash-slack-app.vercel.app/ (temporary URL);
- Slack App Directory (in the future);
- Etc;
After installed, we resolve the authorization to an `access_token` that
the user can paste into the Unleash Slack App addon configuration form.
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/14320932/6a6621b9-5b8a-4921-a279-30668be6d46c
Co-authored by: @daveleek
---------
Co-authored-by: David Leek <david@getunleash.io>
This PR lays most of the groundwork required for emitting events when
features are marked as potentially stale by Unleash. It does **not**
emit any events just yet. The summary is:
- periodically look for features that are potentially stale and mark
them (set to run every 10 seconds for now; can be changed)
- when features are updated, if the update data contains changes to the
feature's type or createdAt date, also update the potentially stale
status.
It is currently about 220 lines of tests and about 100 lines of
application code (primarily db migration and two new methods on the
IFeatureToggleStore interface).
The reason I wanted to put this into a single PR (instead of just the db
migration, then just the potentially stale marking, then the update
logic) is:
If users get the db migration first, but not the rest of the update
logic until the events are fired, then they could get a bunch of new
events for features that should have been marked as potentially stale
several days/weeks/months ago. That seemed undesirable to me, so I
decided to bunch those changes together. Of course, I'd be happy to
break it into smaller parts.
## Rules
A toggle will be marked as potentially stale iff:
- it is not already stale
- its createdAt date is older than its feature type's expected lifetime
would dictate
## Migration
The migration adds a new `potentially_stale` column to the features
table and sets this to true for any toggles that have exceeded their
expected lifetime and that have not already been marked as `stale`.
## Discussion
### The `currentTime` parameter of `markPotentiallyStaleFeatures`
The `markPotentiallyStaleFetaures` method takes an optional
`currentTime` parameter. This was added to make it easier to test (so
you can test "into the future"), but it's not used in the application.
We can rewrite the tests to instead update feature toggles manually, but
that wouldn't test the actual marking method. Happy to discuss.
## About the changes
Fix un-awaited promise on batch variant update - reduce function allowed
TS to skip Promise type.
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
Adds description and summary to `favorite` endpoints
## 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 #
[1-1098](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-1098/openapi-features-favorites)
<!-- (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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
In some of the places we used `NoAccessError` for permissions, other
places we used it for a more generic 403 error with a different
message. This refactoring splits the error type into two distinct
types instead to make the error messages more consistent.
This PR fixes an issue where events generated during a db transaction
would get published before the transaction was complete. This caused
errors in some of our services that expected the data to be stored
before the transaction had been commited. Refer to [linear issue
1-1049](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-1049/event-emitter-should-emit-events-after-db-transaction-is-commited-not)
for more info.
Fixes 1-1049.
## Changes
The most important change here is that the `eventStore` no longer emits
events when they happen (because that can be in the middle of a
transaction). Instead, events are stored with a new `announced` column.
The new event announcer service runs on a schedule (every second) and
publishes any new events that have not been published.
Parts of the code have largely been lifted from the
`client-application-store`, which uses a similar logic.
I have kept the emitting of the event within the event store because a
lot of other services listen to events from this store, so removing that
would require a large rewrite. It's something we could look into down
the line, but it seems like too much of a change to do right now.
## Discussion
### Terminology:
Published vs announced? We should settle on one or the other. Announced
is consistent with the client-application store, but published sounds
more fitting for events.
### Publishing and marking events as published
The current implementation fetches all events that haven't been marked
as announced, sets them as announced, and then emits them. It's possible
that Unleash would crash in the interim or something else might happen,
causing the events not to get published. Maybe it would make sense to
just fetch the events and only mark them as published after the
announcement? On the other hand, that might get us into other problems.
Any thoughts on this would be much appreciated.
### What
This PR adds documentation for our endpoints that are covered by our
"Events" tag. It also adds a type for all valid events, and then uses
this as valid values for type argument.
This PR updates endpoints and schemas for the API tokens tag.
As part of that, they also handle oneOf openapi validation errors and improve the console output for the enforcer tests.
Background (general): I don’t think it creates any value. I don’t think
people check the snapshot explicitly (especially now that it’s so large
that it gets hidden by default), and it only creates an extra chore that
you forget to do all the time (at least I do).
Background (why now?): I’ve been fighting a weird issue with the
snapshot test for the [API tokens OpenAPI
PR](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/4137). The tests run fine
locally, but fail in CI. The tests seem to be using an old version of
the snapshot for the test. However, when I check the snapshot in the
files tab, it’s got the new and correct values. I’ve spent probably more
than an hour trying to fix and debug this today but to no avail.
## What
This adds openapi documentation for the Auth tagged operations and
connected schemas.
## Discussion points
Our user schema seems to be exposing quite a bit of internal fields, I
flagged the isApi field as deprecated, I can imagine quite a few of
these fields also being deprecated to prepare for removal in next major
version, but I was unsure which ones were safe to do so with.
## Observation
We have some technical debt around the shape of the schema we're
claiming we're returning and what we actually are returning. I believe
@gastonfournier also observed this when we turned on validation for our
endpoints.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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. -->
Adds a UI that shows current status of version and feature usage
collection configuration, and a presence in the configuration menu +
menu bar.
Configuring these features is done by setting environment variables. The
version info collection is an existing feature that we're making more
visible, the feature usage collection feature is a new feature that has
it's own environment configuration but also depends on version info
collection being active to work.
When version collection is turned off and the experimental feature flag
for feature usage collection is turned off:
<img width="1269" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/435a07da-d238-4b5b-a150-07e3bd6b816f">
When version collection is turned on and the experimental feature flag
is off:
<img width="1249" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/8d1a76c5-99c9-4551-9a4f-86d477bbbf6f">
When the experimental feature flag is enabled, and version+telemetry is
turned off:
<img width="1239" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/e0bc532b-be94-4076-bee1-faef9bc48a5b">
When version collection is turned on, the experimental feature flag is
enabled, and telemetry collection is turned off:
<img width="1234" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/1bd190c1-08fe-4402-bde3-56f863a33289">
When version collection is turned on, the experimental feature flag is
enabled, and telemetry collection is turned on:
<img width="1229" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/848912cd-30bd-43cf-9b81-c58a4cbad1e4">
When version collection is turned off, the experimental feature flag is
enabled, and telemetry collection is turned on:
<img width="1241" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/d2b981f2-033f-4fae-a115-f93e0653729b">
---------
Co-authored-by: sighphyre <liquidwicked64@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
### What
Added documentation for context fields and endpoints tagged with the
"Context" tag.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
This PR adds strategy titles as an optional bit of data added to client
features. It's only added when prompted.
## Discussion points:
### getPlaygroundFeatures
The optional `includeStrategyId` parameter has been replaced by a
`getPlaygroundFeatures` in the service (and in the underlying store).
The playground was the only place that used this specific include, so
instead of adding more and making the interface for that method more
complex, I created a new method that deals specifically with the
playground.
The underlying store still uses an `optionalIncludes` parameter,
however. I have a plan to make that interface more fluid, but I'd like
to propose that in a follow-up PR.
## About the changes
`getUserRootRoles` should also consider custom root roles
This introduces test cases that unveiled a dependency between stores
(this happens actually at the DB layer having access-service access
tables from two different stores but skipping the store layer).
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1161/a-user-with-custom-root-role-and-permission-to-create-client-api
---------
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
This PR changes the OpenAPI schema for the advanced playground to not
accept empty lists of environments and to not accept environment names
that don't match the env name pattern we use.
The pattern is the same as the one we use for controlling environment
names on creation.
However, there is a (small) chance that these may get out of sync later,
so we could do something to only define this pattern once (and import it
in the enterprise package), but that may be more work than is necessary,
and I'd suggest we do that later.
I've also added a minLength to the string items although it isn't
strictly necessary. It's primarily to give the users better feedback if
the name is empty.
This change adds an "edit" link to all playground strategies when they
are returned from the API, allowing the user to jump directly to the
evaluated strategy edit screen.
This change applies to both old and new strategies, so it should even
work in the old playground.
This does not use this information in the frontend yet.
## Discussion points:
Should "links" be an object or a singular string? I know the
notifications service uses just "link", but using an object will make
it easier to potentially add more actions in the future (such as
"enable"/"disable", maybe?)
Do we need to supply basePath? I noticed that the notifications links
only ever use an empty string for base path, so it might not be
necessary and can potentially be left out.
## Changes
I've implemented the link building in a new view model file. Inspecting
the output after the result is fully ready requires some gnarly
introspection and mapping, but it's tested.
Further, I've done a little bit of work to stop the playground service
using the schema types directly as the schema types now contain extra
information.
This PR also updates the `urlFriendlyString` arbitrary to not produce
strings that contain only periods. This causes issues when parsing URLs
(and is also something we struggle with in the UI).
## What
As part of the move to enable custom-root-roles, our permissions model
was found to not be granular enough to allow service accounts to only be
allowed to create read-only tokens (client, frontend), but not be
allowed to create admin tokens to avoid opening up a path for privilege
escalation.
## How
This PR adds 12 new roles, a CRUD set for each of the three token types
(admin, client, frontend). To access the `/api/admin/api-tokens`
endpoints you will still need the existing permission (CREATE_API_TOKEN,
DELETE_API_TOKEN, READ_API_TOKEN, UPDATE_API_TOKEN). Once this PR has
been merged the token type you're modifying will also be checked, so if
you're trying to create a CLIENT api-token, you will need
`CREATE_API_TOKEN` and `CREATE_CLIENT_API_TOKEN` permissions. If the
user performing the create call does not have these two permissions or
the `ADMIN` permission, the creation will be rejected with a `403 -
FORBIDDEN` status.
### Discussion points
The test suite tests all operations using a token with
operation_CLIENT_API_TOKEN permission and verifies that it fails trying
to do any of the operations against FRONTEND and ADMIN tokens. During
development the operation_FRONTEND_API_TOKEN and
operation_ADMIN_API_TOKEN permission has also been tested in the same
way. I wonder if it's worth it to re-add these tests in order to verify
that the permission checker works for all operations, or if this is
enough. Since we're running them using e2e tests, I've removed them for
now, to avoid hogging too much processing time.
This change adds a little more detail to the client metrics schema. The
description for variants felt a
little unclear.
---------
Co-authored-by: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
Implements custom root roles, encompassing a lot of different areas of
the project, and slightly refactoring the current roles logic. It
includes quite a clean up.
This feature itself is behind a flag: `customRootRoles`
This feature covers root roles in:
- Users;
- Service Accounts;
- Groups;
Apologies in advance. I may have gotten a bit carried away 🙈
### Roles
We now have a new admin tab called "Roles" where we can see all root
roles and manage custom ones. We are not allowed to edit or remove
*predefined* roles.
This meant slightly pushing away the existing roles to `project-roles`
instead. One idea we want to explore in the future is to unify both
types of roles in the UI instead of having 2 separate tabs. This
includes modernizing project roles to fit more into our current design
and decisions.
Hovering the permissions cell expands detailed information about the
role:
### Create and edit role
Here's how the role form looks like (create / edit):
Here I categorized permissions so it's easier to visualize and manage
from a UX perspective.
I'm using the same endpoint as before. I tried to unify the logic and
get rid of the `projectRole` specific hooks. What distinguishes custom
root roles from custom project roles is the extra `root-custom` type we
see on the payload. By default we assume `custom` (custom project role)
instead, which should help in terms of backwards compatibility.
### Delete role
When we delete a custom role we try to help the end user make an
informed decision by listing all the entities which currently use this
custom root role:
~~As mentioned in the screenshot, when deleting a custom role, we demote
all entities associated with it to the predefined `Viewer` role.~~
**EDIT**: Apparently we currently block this from the API
(access-service deleteRole) with a message:
What should the correct behavior be?
### Role selector
I added a new easy-to-use role selector component that is present in:
- Users
- Service Accounts
- Groups
### Role description
I also added a new role description component that you can see below the
dropdown in the selector component, but it's also used to better
describe each role in the respective tables:
I'm not listing all the permissions of predefined roles. Those simply
show the description in the tooltip:
### Role badge
Groups is a bit different, since it uses a list of cards, so I added yet
another component - Role badge:
I'm using this same component on the profile tab:
## Discussion points
- Are we being defensive enough with the use of the flag? Should we
cover more?
- Are we breaking backwards compatibility in any way?
- What should we do when removing a role? Block or demote?
- Maybe some existing permission-related issues will surface with this
change: Are we being specific enough with our permissions? A lot of
places are simply checking for `ADMIN`;
- We may want to get rid of the API roles coupling we have with the
users and SAs and instead use the new hooks (e.g. `useRoles`)
explicitly;
- We should update the docs;
- Maybe we could allow the user to add a custom role directly from the
role selector component;
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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. -->
Adds feature usage info and custom strategy counters to the version
check object.
<!-- 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? -->
## About the changes
When a feature is not found in a project we should fail with a NotFound
error. If the feature belongs to a different project, it should not be a
permission issue, because the user might not be aware (lack of
permissions/visibility) of that other project, so even in this case the
error should be NotFound (this also works if we ever allow the same
feature name in different projects)
Fixes#3726
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
Edit application under
https://app.unleash-hosted.com/demo/applications/test-app is currently
not working as the appName is expected to come in the request body, but
it's actually part of the url. We have two options here:
1. We change the UI to adapt to the expectations of the request by
adding appName to the request body (and eventually removing appName from
the URL, which would be a breaking change)
2. We remove the restriction of only sending the appName in the body and
take the one that comes in the URL. We have a validation that verifies
that at least one of the two sets the appName
([here](e376088668/src/lib/services/client-metrics/instance-service.ts (L208))
we validate using [this
schema](e376088668/src/lib/services/client-metrics/schema.ts (L55-L70)))
In terms of REST API, we can assume that the appName will be present in
the resource `/api/admin/metrics/applications` (an endpoint we don't
have), but when we're updating an application we should refer to that
application by its URL: `/api/admin/metrics/applications/<appName>` and
the presence of an appName in the body might indicate that we're trying
to change the name of the application (something we currently not
support)
Based on the above, I believe going with the second option is best, as
it adheres to REST principles and does not require a breaking change.
Despite that, we only support updating applications as the creation is
done from metrics ingestion
Fixes: #3580
This PR improves our handling of internal Joi errors, to make them more
sensible to the end user. It does that by providing a better description
of the errors and by telling the user what they value they provided was.
Previous conversion:
```json
{
"id": "705a8dc0-1198-4894-9015-f1e5b9992b48",
"name": "BadDataError",
"message": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items",
"details": [
{
"message": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items",
"description": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items"
}
]
}
```
New conversion:
```json
{
"id": "87fb4715-cbdd-48bb-b4d7-d354e7d97380",
"name": "BadDataError",
"message": "Request validation failed: your request body contains invalid data. Refer to the `details` list for more information.",
"details": [
{
"description": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items. You provided [].",
"message": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items. You provided []."
}
]
}
```
## Restructuring
This PR moves some code out of `unleash-error.ts` and into a new file.
The purpose of this is twofold:
1. avoid circular dependencies (we need imports from both UnleashError
and BadDataError)
2. carve out a clearer separation of concerns, keeping `unleash-error` a
little more focused.
If apiTokens are enabled breaks middleware chain with a 401 if no token
is found for requests to client and frontend apis. Previously the
middleware allowed the chain to process.
Removes the regex search for multiple slashes, and instead configures
the apiTokenMiddleware to reject unauthorized requests.
After a Team Retro, one of our squads felt like we needed more data on
our test suites. This is the first effort to make our test results
easier to grab. It uses the test-reporter action to add a github check
to our main build and PR builds with our test results.
This at least should make it easier to parse which tests are failing.
However, it does not give us trends. So it does not yet make it easier
to decide which tests are flaky just from a quick view.
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1071/prevent-users-from-disabling-password-authentication-when-there-are-no
Improves the behavior of disabling password based login by adding some
relevant information and a confirmation dialog with a warning. This felt
better than trying to disable the toggle, by still allowing the end
users to make the decision, except now it should be a properly informed
decision with confirmation.
- **Password based administrators**: Admin accounts that have a password
set;
- **Other administrators**: Other admin users that do not have a
password. May be SSO, but may also be users that did not set a password
yet;
- **Admin service accounts**: Service accounts that have the admin root
role. Depending on how you're using the SA this may not necessarily mean
locking yourself out of an admin account, especially if you secured its
token beforehand;
- **Admin API tokens**: Similar to the above. If you secured an admin
API token beforehand, you still have access to all features through the
API;
Each one of them link to the respective page inside Unleash (e.g. users
page, service accounts page, tokens page...);
If you try to disable and press "save", and only in that scenario, you
are presented with the following confirmation dialog:
<!-- 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
<!-- 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. -->
Improves the openapi schema specifications for the schemas belonging to
the "Projects" tag.
Expected error codes/http statues, descriptions, and example data
---------
Co-authored-by: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
### What
In the demo when listing possible users to grant access to your project,
we inadvertently expose emails when listing users you can grant access
to. This PR anonymises the access list on the way out.
This PR reuses the revision Id information from the "optimal 304 for
server SDKs" to improve the freshness of the frontend API config data.
In addition it allows us to reduce the polling (and eventually remove it
when we are confident).
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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. -->
OpenAPI schema updates for Personal Access Tokens, http statuses,
property types and examples, return types
---------
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
Co-authored-by: mergify[bot] <37929162+mergify[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
- Creates a dialog when the feature has ONLY disabled strategies and the
environment in turned on
- Adds functionality to either `enable` the strategies or add the
default one (if a project specific default strategy is set, uses it)
## 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? -->
Uploading Screen Recording 2023-05-05 at 17.40.48.mov…
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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
- Removed `strategyTitle` and `strategyDisable` flags. Unified under
`strategyImprovements` flag
- Implements the default strategy UI
- Bug fixes
## 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 #
[1-875](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-875/default-strategy-frontend)
<!-- (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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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. -->
This deprecates the `username` properties on api-token schemas, and adds
a `tokenName` property.
DB field `username` has been renamed to `token_name`, migration added
for the rename.
Both `username` and `tokenName` can be used when consuming the service,
but only one of them.
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
There's a couple of things I'd like to get opinions on and discuss:
- Frontend still uses the deprecated `username` property
- ApiTokenSchema is used both for input and output of `Create`
controller endpoints and should be split out into separate schemas. I'll
set up a task for this
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: mergify[bot] <37929162+mergify[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
set feature.enabled to false when all strategies are deactivated
## 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Prabodh Meshram <prabodh.meshram7@gmail.com>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
Fixes ImportOptions.tsx
## 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Prabodh Meshram <prabodh.meshram7@gmail.com>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
Adds default strategy to project environment link table
## 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 #
[1-876](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-876/default-strategy-backend)
<!-- (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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
I've copied most of the descriptions from what we did for batch metrics
under the Edge tag, however there are a couple of top level descriptions
that are "fine" but I'm definitely open to suggestions.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
### What
We've had this marked as deprecated through our v4, this PR removes it.
### Worth noting
This updates the deprecation notices with removal notices in the
documentation as well.
### Considerations
The tags API is still located under
/api/admin/features/{featureName}/tags. It should be moved to
/api/admin/projects/{project}/features/{featureName}/tags. I vote we do
that in a separate PR, we'd probably also need to deprecate the existing
tags endpoints for v5 and remove in v6. We could use 308s to signify
that they are moved.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
This PR fixes a broken e2e test by relaxing what it checks for. It must
have been developed in parallel so that the test wasn't included before
merging into main.
This PR implements the first version of a suggested unification (and
documentation) of the errors that we return from the API today.
The goal is for this to be the first step towards the error type defined
in this internal [linear
task](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-629/define-the-error-type
'Define the new API error type').
## The state of things today
As things stand, we currently have no (or **very** little) documentation
of the errors that are returned from the API. We mention error codes,
but never what the errors may contain.
Second, there is no specified format for errors, so what they return is
arbitrary, and based on ... Who knows? As a result, we have multiple
different errors returned by the API depending on what operation you're
trying to do. What's more, with OpenAPI validation in the mix, it's
absolutely possible for you to get two completely different error
objects for operations to the same endpoint.
Third, the errors we do return are usually pretty vague and don't really
provide any real help to the user. "You don't have the right
permissions". Great. Well what permissions do I need? And how would I
know? "BadDataError". Sick. Why is it bad?
... You get it.
## What we want to achieve
The ultimate goal is for error messages to serve both humans and
machines. When the user provides bad data, we should tell them what
parts of the data are bad and what they can do to fix it. When they
don't have the right permissions, we should tell them what permissions
they need.
Additionally, it would be nice if we could provide an ID for each error
instance, so that you (or an admin) can look through the logs and locate
he incident.
## What's included in **this** PR?
This PR does not aim to implement everything above. It's not intended to
magically fix everything. Its goal is to implement the necessary
**breaking** changes, so that they can be included in v5. Changing error
messages is a slightly grayer area than changing APIs directly, but
changing the format is definitely something I'd consider breaking.
So this PR:
- defines a minimal version of the error type defined in the [API error
definition linear
task](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-629/define-the-error-type).
- aims to catch all errors we return today and wrap them in the error
type
- updates tests to match the new expectations.
An important point: because we are cutting v5 very soon and because work
for this wasn't started until last week, the code here isn't necessarily
very polished. But it doesn't need to be. The internals can be as messy
as we want, as long as the API surface is stable.
That said, I'm very open to feedback about design and code completeness,
etc, but this has intentionally been done quickly.
Please also see my inline comments on the changes for more specific
details.
### Proposed follow-ups
As mentioned, this is the first step to implementing the error type. The
public API error type only exposes `id`, `name`, and `message`. This is
barely any more than most of the previous messages, but they are now all
using the same format. Any additional properties, such as `suggestion`,
`help`, `documentationLink` etc can be added as features without
breaking the current format. This is an intentional limitation of this
PR.
Regarding additional properties: there are some error responses that
must contain extra properties. Some of these are documented in the types
of the new error constructor, but not all. This includes `path` and
`type` properties on 401 errors, `details` on validation errors, and
more.
Also, because it was put together quickly, I don't yet know exactly how
we (as developers) would **prefer** to use these new error messages
within the code, so the internal API (the new type, name, etc), is just
a suggestion. This can evolve naturally over time if (based on feedback
and experience) without changing the public API.
## Returning multiple errors
Most of the time when we return errors today, we only return a single
error (even if many things are wrong). AJV, the OpenAPI integration we
use does have a setting that allows it to return all errors in a request
instead of a single one. I suggest we turn that on, but that we do it in
a separate PR (because it updates a number of other snapshots).
When returning errors that point to `details`, the objects in the
`details` now contain a new `description` property. This "deprecates"
the `message` property. Due to our general deprecation policy, this
should be kept around for another full major and can be removed in v6.
```json
{
"name": "BadDataError",
"message": "Something went wrong. Check the `details` property for more information."
"details": [{
"message": "The .params property must be an object. You provided an array.",
"description": "The .params property must be an object. You provided an array.",
}]
}
```
Add 'default' when creating or throw error when updating a
flexibleRollout strategy with empty stickiness
<!-- 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
<!-- 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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
<!-- 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 #
[1-863](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-836/update-endpoints-for-tag-public-signup-tokens)
<!-- (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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
Adds enabled field to feature strategies
Filter out disabled strategies when returning/evaluating
## 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 #
[1-865](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-865/allow-for-enablingdisabling-strategies-in-place-backend)
<!-- (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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
feat: adds a way to specify a root role on a group, which will cause any user entering into that group to take on the permissions of that root role
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
## About the changes
Seed setup fails because of compilation errors, we need to skip errors
until we fix them. Also, this removes one usage of `/api/admin/features`
that was used only for testing
