Part of https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/526
An active workspace's defaultRoleId should never be null.
We can't rely on a simple postgres NOT NULL constraint as defaultRoleId
will always be initially null when the workspace is first created since
the roles do not exist at that time.
Since a suspended workspace can be active again, we should maintain that
rule during the workspace suspension. The only moment defaultRoleId can
have a null value is during the onboarding. this pr enforces that
Closes https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/526
(for reminder:
1. Make defaultRoleId non-nullable for an active workspace
2. Remove permissions V1 feature flag
3. Set member role as default role for new workspaces
About 1.:
An active workspace's defaultRoleId should never be null.
We can't rely on a simple postgres NOT NULL constraint as defaultRoleId
will always be initially null when the workspace is first created since
the roles do not exist at that time.
Let's add a more complex rule to ensure that
About 3.:
In the first phase of our deploy of permissions, we chose to assign
admin role to all existing users, not to break any existing behavior
with the introduction of the feature (= existing users have less rights
than before).
As we deploy permissions to all existing and future workspaces, let's
set the member role as default role for future workspaces.
)
In [a previous PR](https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/11023) I
fixed the issue where users where re-assigned the default role when
signin up using SSO.
The "fix" actually introduced another error, calling
`assignRoleToUserWorkspace` only when a user is signing up to twenty,
forgetting about the case where an existing twenty user signs up to a
different workspace. They should still be assigned the role in that
case.
To fix this and improve clarity, I moved assignRoleToUserWorkspace to
addUserToWorkspace and renamed addUserToWorkspace to
addUserToWorkspaceIfUserNotInWorkspace since this is at each sign in but
does nothing if user is already in the workspace.
I think ideally we should refactor this part to improve readability and
understandability, maybe with different flows for each case: signIn and
signUp, to twenty or to a workspace
When logging using a SSO method, we call signInUp service in which we
were wrongfully assigning a role to the user even if the user is signing
in and not signin up.
This went unnoticed during our QA as a different sign-in method is
called when logging with the credentials.
---------
Co-authored-by: Weiko <corentin@twenty.com>
Closes https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/469 and
https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/500
In this PR
1. stop conditioning permission initialization for a workspace to env
variable value. Instead we want to create and assign permissions and
roles in all new workspaces. For now that will be totally silent.
2. temporarily, the default role is set to the admin role for new
workspaces. it will also be the case for existing workspaces through the
backfill command. Member role is still being created though. (when we
will do the final roll-out we will update this so that future workspaces
have the member role as default role. our goal here is not to break any
current behaviour for users, that today have all have the equivalent of
admin rights).
During sign-up, new users setting new workspaces are required to choose
a billing plan (30-days or 7 days). They are then redirected to
billing.twenty.com to confirm and configure their plan choice.
Then they are quickly redirected to /settings/billing before being
redirected to /create-workspace.
The problem is that even though /create-workspace is not a gated path,
/settings/billing is: it is a path gated by WORKSPACE permission which
has not been granted to the user at this stage. therefore the user is
not redirected to /create-workspace since they do not reach
/settings/billing path but is redirected to the profile page instead.
(To see this feature flag must be removed + billing enabled: you can use
this branch [from this closed
PR](https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10570)).
The chosen workaround is to bypass, in the FE, the permission check for
WORKSPACE permission if the workspace's activation status is
PENDING_CREATION. There is no need for any BE change.
A user should not be able to delete their account if they are the last
admin of a workspace.
It means that if a user wants to sign out of twenty, they should delete
their workspace, not their account
In this PR
- updateWorkspaceMemberRole api was changed to stop allowing null as a
valid value for roleId. it is not possible anymore to just unassign a
role from a user. instead it is only possible to assign a different role
to a user, which will unassign them from their previous role. For this
reason in the FE the bins icons next to the workspaceMember on a role
page were removed
- updateWorkspaceMemberRole will throw if a user attempts to update
their own role
- tests tests tests!
- Adding permission gates on workspaceMember to only allow user with
admin permissions OR users attempting to update or delete themself to
perform write operations on workspaceMember object
- Reverting some changes to treat workflow objects as regular metadata
objects (any user can interact with them)
- (fix) Block updates on soft deleted records
Adding permission gates on all workspace-invitations endpoints:
sendInvitation, resendInvitation, deleteWorkspaceInvitation,
findWorkspaceInvitations (the latter being from my understanding only
used to list the invitations to then re-send them or detee them).
+ tests on Api & webhooks permission gates
Following a conversation with @etiennejouan and @martmull, we are adding
a permission gate on billing resolver's checkoutSession, which should
only be accessible to entitled users or at workspace creation (when
there are no roles yet), when the subscription is incomplete
Closes https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/393
- enforcing object-records permission checks in resolvers for now. we
will move the logic to a lower level asap
- add integration tests that will still be useful when we have moved the
logic
- introduce guest seeded role to test limited permissions on
object-records
This was updated a few weeks ago and went unnoticed since 1) integration
tests were broken + 2) we don't have actionnable updateMany mutations in
the product at the moment
It will fix some tests, at least
all-people-resolvers.integration-spec.ts for instance
After introducing userWorkspaceId into JWTs, we were wrongfully
executing
```
const userWorkspace = await this.userWorkspaceRepository.findOne({
where: {
id: payload.userWorkspaceId,
},
});
```
which would return a random userWorkpace if `payload.userWorkspaceId` is
undefined.
All generated JWTs have had a userWorkspaceId for more than a week now,
but in tests we had not modified the accessToken in use, which did not
have a userWorkspaceId, until [this
pr](https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10204)
In this PR
- closing https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/313
- adding permission gates on workspace settings and security settings
- adding integration tests for each of the protected setting and
security
Adding SettingsPermissionsGuard to execute permission check.
The guard is added directly in resolver, either at resolver level (ex:
roles) or resolver-endpoint level (ex: metadata). this can be challenged
!
In this PR, we are implementing the updateRole endpoint with the
following rules
1. A user can only update a member's role if they have the permission (=
the admin role)
2. Admin role can't be unassigned if there are no other admin in the
workspace
3. (For now) as members can only have one role for now, when they are
assigned a new role, they are first unassigned the other role (if any)
4. (For now) removing a member's admin role = leaving the member with no
role = calling updateRole with a null roleId
In this PR
- introducing roles module to separate roles logic (assign a Role, get a
workspace's roles etc.) from permission logic (check if a user has a
permission)
- Introduces getRoles endpoint to fetch a workspace's roles
- introduces the first permission check: getRoles in only accessible to
users with permission on ROLE setting. Implemented
validatesUserHasWorkspaceSettingPermissionOrThrow
In this PR
- fixing Collapse on view groups views: aggregate bar should be included
in the collapse (@magrinj )
- respect the html table pattern: the aggregate bar is now a <tr>
element included in a <table> (before that, it was a <tr> not included
in anything)
- add a top-border on the aggregate bar
- introduce short labels for the on-cell value display (display "Empty"
instead of "Count empty" to lighten the interface)
- remove the feature flag !
Removing labelIdentifierFieldMetadataId and
imageIdentifierFieldMetadataId that should not be part of
createObjectInput as they don't make sense for an object yet to create
and will break
As a follow-up of https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/9304, we are
here creating a migration to run at the next release, aiming at adding
the new aggregate operation options (CountEmpty, CountNotEmpty, ...,
PercentEmpty, PercentNotEmpty) to the enums on View and ViewField's
aggregateOperations fields.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lucas Bordeau <bordeau.lucas@gmail.com>
As part of our rollout strategy, let's remove the workspaces gates,
which will trigger the creation of the field metadatas needed for the
aggregate queries features.
In a later release we will remove the feature flag completely, after all
fields have been created for all workspaces
isLabelSyncedWithName should be nullable for fieldMetadata, as it is for
objectMetadata.
+ Adding missing validation on label and name sync in
fieldMetadataService for creation and update
+ adding metadata tests
In this PR, we are introducing aggregate queries on table views, behind
a feature flag.
This does not work with view groups yet, nor with views that have
records until the bottom. (both will be tackled next)
We were experiencing infinite loading on field settings pages (creation
of new field), due to the fact that the component was being rendered on
and on and on.
This was due to useGetCurrentUserQuery calls outside of the update
function, causing renders in cascade. We also had an issue with the
component being unmounted too often.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charles Bochet <charles@twenty.com>
Currently when renaming an object, we execute
```
await this.fieldMetadataRepository
.findOneByOrFail({
name: existingObjectMetadata.nameSingular,
label: existingObjectMetadata.labelSingular,
objectMetadataId: relatedObject.id,
workspaceId: workspaceId,
})
```
to find the standard relation fields.
This would throw an error if the label solely was update beforehand
without updating the name too: in that case we will not have migrated
the label of the standard relation fields (which is maybe a mistake?
@Weiko wdyt?).
Let's remove it.
In this PR
1. Add integration tests for /metadata (master issue:
https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/8719)
2. Fix relation deletion: index on "from" object was not deleted,
impeding creation of a new relation between the same two objects A and B
after relation between A and B was deleted
Refactoring update of standard relations when a custom object is
renamed, after observing occasional issues.
---------
Co-authored-by: Weiko <corentin@twenty.com>
We were not handling relations in the search resolver, which started
being an issue as we query those relations in the combinedSearch queries
(introduced here https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/8564); they
were nullified in the response payload. The response was overwriting
findManyRecords results in the cache as it contained the exact same
fields.
So we now
1. Handle relations in the search resolver
2. Stop querying relations in search queries (no use)
Search vector fields based on `RICH_TEXT` fields were generated using a
treatment on `RICH_TEXT` fields's `body`
column, to only extract and index the core text.
([PR](https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/7953))
Actually our RICH_TEXT fields are of datatype `text` in our database,
allowing users to insert non-json values, which breaks the search vector
generation (as it expects json values).
Our vision is unclear for now: for instance we may want to turn
RICH_TEXT into a composite field where the plain text would be stored in
a different column.
So for now, we will (1) treat rich_text data as text, and (2) update the
search vector expressions for the existing workspaces.
Simplifying the logic around multi-object pickers and search by getting
rid of the behaviour that keeped selected elements even when they did
not match the search filter (eg keeping selected record "Brian Chesky"
in dropdown even when search input is "Qonto"). This allows us to
simplify the fetch queries around the search to only do one query.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lucas Bordeau <bordeau.lucas@gmail.com>
Fixes https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/8233
Typing a search input was triggering a re-render of the whole
RecordBoardCard, resetting the search input to its initial value, an
empty string, making it impossible to actually type anything.
useRelationPicker had (legacy?) useless dependencies to recoil states
that caused the rerenders.
[This PR](https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/8210) introduced a
regression, causing noteId or taskId (respectively for noteTarget or
taskTarget creation) to be overwritten with an undefined value in the
input for noteTarget or taskTarget creation.
This is because in ActivityTargetInlineCellEditMode, in addition to the
noteId and taskId we are declaring, we are looking into the object
(noteTarget or taskTarget)'s fields and prefilling the record-to-create
with a value, potentially undefined, for all of the object fields.
So when looping over noteTarget's fields, we would find the `note`
relation field, and eventually add `note: undefined` to the
record-to-create input, in addition to the non-empty and valid existing
`noteId`.
Then in sanitizeRecordInput, from the note added right above, we add an
empty noteId to the input from node, overwriting the "good" noteId.
There are several ways to fix this, I chose to update prefillRecord not
to add an empty "note" object that makes no sense in addition to the
"noteId" we already have at this stage.
It is also possible to update `sanitizeRecordInput` not to overwrite a
value from a relation (noteId from note relation) if there is already a
value in the input.
SingleEntitySelect was wrongfully showing the empty option (eg "No
company") as selected if the selected option was not showing in the
list, because of a search filter for instance (eg selected option is
"Linkedin" but search filter is "a").
Fixing this and removing misleading prop selectedEntity from components
where it is never passed.
In the expression of our searchVector fields, we use the "simple"
configuration (over the default "english" one), to avoid picking a
language that's irrelevant to the user.
I initially forgot to add the same configuration to the query that is
being sent using ts_query.
Adding it will also allow the search to work for a single character,
while so far a single letter was most of the time considered a "stop
word" (a word with no semantic value, like "a").
Marie