# Introduction
In a nutshell this PR introduces a `workspaceMemberEntity` to
`workspaceMemberDto` transpilation which was not done but commented as
`// TODO` across the `user resolver`.
Also passed on the `Roles` and `UserWorkspacePermissions` transpilation
We now also compute the roles for the `workspaceMember` resolver ( not
only the `workspaceMembers` )
Some refactor
In the following days about to create a PR that introduces integration
testing on the user resolver
## Conclusion
As always any suggestions are more than welcomed ! Please let me know !
## Misc
Following https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/11914
closing https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/1011
In this PR
- Determine object record permissions on workflows objects (workflow,
workflowVersion, workflowRun) base on settings permissions @Weiko
- Add Workflow permission guards on workflow resolvers @thomtrp . **Any
method within a resolver that has the SettingsPermission Guard is only
callable by a apiKey or a user that has the permission** (so not by
external parties).
- Add checks bypass in workflow services since 1) for actions gated by
settings permissions, the gate should be done at resolver level, so it
will have been done before the call to the service 2) some service
methods may be called by workflowTriggerController which is callable by
external parties without permissions (ex:
workflowCommonWorkspaceService.getWorkflowVersionOrFail). This is
something we may want to change in the future (still to discuss), by
removing the guard at resolver-level and relying on
shouldBypassPermissionChecks at getRepository and made in a way that we
only bypass for external parties.
- Add checks bypass for actions performed by workflows since they should
not be restricted in our current vision
- Add tests
# What
Fully deprecate old relations because we have one bug tied to it and it
make the codebase complex
# How I've made this PR:
1. remove metadata datasource (we only keep 'core') => this was causing
extra complexity in the refactor + flaky reset
2. merge dev and demo datasets => as I needed to update the tests which
is very painful, I don't want to do it twice
3. remove all code tied to RELATION_METADATA /
relation-metadata.resolver, or anything tied to the old relation system
4. Remove ONE_TO_ONE and MANY_TO_MANY that are not supported
5. fix impacts on the different areas : see functional testing below
# Functional testing
## Functional testing from the front-end:
1. Database Reset ✅
2. Sign In ✅
3. Workspace sign-up ✅
5. Browsing table / kanban / show ✅
6. Assigning a record in a one to many / in a many to one ✅
7. Deleting a record involved in a relation ✅ => broken but not tied to
this PR
8. "Add new" from relation picker ✅ => broken but not tied to this PR
9. Creating a Task / Note, Updating a Task / Note relations, Deleting a
Task / Note (from table, show page, right drawer) ✅ => broken but not
tied to this PR
10. creating a relation from settings (custom / standard x oneToMany /
manyToOne) ✅
11. updating a relation from settings should not be possible ✅
12. deleting a relation from settings (custom / standard x oneToMany /
manyToOne) ✅
13. Make sure timeline activity still work (relation were involved
there), espacially with Task / Note => to be double checked ✅ => Cannot
convert undefined or null to object
14. Workspace deletion / User deletion ✅
15. CSV Import should keep working ✅
16. Permissions: I have tested without permissions V2 as it's still hard
to test v2 work and it's not in prod yet ✅
17. Workflows global test ✅
## From the API:
1. Review open-api documentation (REST) ✅
2. Make sure REST Api are still able to fetch relations ==> won't do, we
have a coupling Get/Update/Create there, this requires refactoring
3. Make sure REST Api is still able to update / remove relation => won't
do same
## Automated tests
1. lint + typescript ✅
2. front unit tests: ✅
3. server unit tests 2 ✅
4. front stories: ✅
5. server integration: ✅
6. chromatic check : expected 0
7. e2e check : expected no more that current failures
## Remove // Todos
1. All are captured by functional tests above, nothing additional to do
## (Un)related regressions
1. Table loading state is not working anymore, we see the empty state
before table content
2. Filtering by Creator Tim Ap return empty results
3. Not possible to add Tasks / Notes / Files from show page
# Result
## New seeds that can be easily extended
<img width="1920" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d290d130-2a5f-44e6-b419-7e42a89eec4b"
/>
## -5k lines of code
## No more 'metadata' dataSource (we only have 'core)
## No more relationMetadata (I haven't drop the table yet it's not
referenced in the code anymore)
## We are ready to fix the 6 months lag between current API results and
our mocked tests
## No more bug on relation creation / deletion
---------
Co-authored-by: Weiko <corentin@twenty.com>
Co-authored-by: Félix Malfait <felix@twenty.com>
In this PR
1. adding tests on relations and nested relations to make sure that if
any permission is missing, the query fails
2. adding tests on objectRecord permissions to make sure that
permissions granted or restricted by objectPermissions take precedence
on the role's allObjectRecords permissions
Closes https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/748
In the frame of the work on permissions we
- remove all raw queries possible to use repositories instead
- forbid usage workspaceDataSource.executeRawQueries()
- restrict usage of workspaceDataSource.query() to force developers to
pass on shouldBypassPermissionChecks to use it.
---------
Co-authored-by: greptile-apps[bot] <165735046+greptile-apps[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## Context
- Introduced objectPermissions in currentUserWorkspace which uses role
permissions from cache so we can fetch granular permissions from the API
- Refactored cached role permissions to map permissions with object
metadata id instead of object metadata name singular to be more flexible
New Cache
<img width="574" alt="Screenshot 2025-05-27 at 11 59 06"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1a090134-1b8a-4681-a630-29f1472178bd"
/>
GQL
<img width="977" alt="Screenshot 2025-05-27 at 11 58 53"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3b9a82b0-6019-4a25-a6e2-a9e0fb4bb8a0"
/>
Next steps: Use the updated API in the FE to fetch granular permissions
and update useHasObjectReadOnlyPermission hook
I encountered a bug where I was missing permissions while calling
searchResolver because the repository from
`twentyORMManager.getRepository` was missing permissions itself.
The repository was returned from the cached repositories map using a
repository key feature the roleId, the rolesVersion and
featureFlagMapVersion.
I was not able to reproduce but this error should not go unnoticed: we
always expect to find objectPermissions for every roleId in the
datasource now.
I was not able to understand what happened for now but I think throwing
the error will help keeping an eye on it
This PR attemps at improving sentry grouping and filtering by
- Using the exceptionCode as the fingerprint when the error is a
customException. For this to work in this PR we are now throwing
customExceptions instead of internalServerError deprived of their code.
They will still be converted to Internal server errors when sent back as
response
- Filtering 4xx issues where it was missing (for emailVerification
because errors were not handled, for invalid captcha and billing errors
because they are httpErrors and not graphqlErrors)
---------
Co-authored-by: Félix Malfait <felix@twenty.com>
In this PR we are
- introducing a cached map `{ userworkspaceId: roleId } `to reduce calls
to get a userWorkspace's role (we were having N+1 around that with
combinedFindMany queries and generally having a lot of avoidable
queries)
- using the roles permissions cache (`{ roleId: { objectNameSingular:
{ canRead: bool, canUpdate: bool, ...} } `) in Permissions V1's
userHasObjectPermission, in order to 1) improve performances to avoid
calls to get roles 2) start using our permissions cache
## Context
CurrentUser is fetched during onboarding however roles and permissions
are not created yet during that stage so an error was thrown. We only
want to fetch permissions after the onboarding of the workspace.
## Context
Now that we can update role settings permissions, we need to reflect
that on the FE as well (hiding/showing nav items + redirection logic).
Feature flag check here is not really needed because since not having
any setting permission will result in the same behavior as Permission
V1.
This PR updates the resolvers to return settings permissions of the
current user
# Introduction
In this PR we've migrated `twenty-shared` from a `vite` app
[libary-mode](https://vite.dev/guide/build#library-mode) to a
[preconstruct](https://preconstruct.tools/) "atomic" application ( in
the future would like to introduce preconstruct to handle of all our
atomic dependencies such as `twenty-emails` `twenty-ui` etc it will be
integrated at the monorepo's root directly, would be to invasive in the
first, starting incremental via `twenty-shared`)
For more information regarding the motivations please refer to nor:
- https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/587
-
https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/281#issuecomment-2630949682
close https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/589
close https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/590
## How to test
In order to ease the review this PR will ship all the codegen at the
very end, the actual meaning full diff is `+2,411 −114`
In order to migrate existing dependent packages to `twenty-shared` multi
barrel new arch you need to run in local:
```sh
yarn tsx packages/twenty-shared/scripts/migrateFromSingleToMultiBarrelImport.ts && \
npx nx run-many -t lint --fix -p twenty-front twenty-ui twenty-server twenty-emails twenty-shared twenty-zapier
```
Note that `migrateFromSingleToMultiBarrelImport` is idempotent, it's atm
included in the PR but should not be merged. ( such as codegen will be
added before merging this script will be removed )
## Misc
- related opened issue preconstruct
https://github.com/preconstruct/preconstruct/issues/617
## Closed related PR
- https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/11028
- https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10993
- https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10960
## Upcoming enhancement: ( in others dedicated PRs )
- 1/ refactor generate barrel to export atomic module instead of `*`
- 2/ generate barrel own package with several files and tests
- 3/ Migration twenty-ui the same way
- 4/ Use `preconstruct` at monorepo global level
## Conclusion
As always any suggestions are welcomed !
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
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).
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!
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
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
## Context
In some CustomException exceptions, we were instantiating a code without
initializing it which was overriding the parent code and it was then
lost when retrieving it in filters.
Removing them to make sure we don't reproduce this pattern
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
# Introduction
Avoid having multiple `isDefined` definition across our pacakges
Also avoid importing `isDefined` from `twenty-ui` which exposes a huge
barrel for a such little util function
## In a nutshell
Removed own `isDefined.ts` definition from `twenty-ui` `twenty-front`
and `twenty-server` to move it to `twenty-shared`.
Updated imports for each packages, and added explicit dependencies to
`twenty-shared` if not already in place
Related PR https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/9941
