45c89a46d6
# Introduction Big diff a lot of tests and snapshots ( real diff < 500+ ) close https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/12117 close https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/12133 ## What has been done here Implemented a strong integration coverage on both fieldmetadata`SELECT` `UPDATE` and `CREATE`. Implemented server side validation for the options `value` `label` `id` and collision issue with also `position` We could improve: - Position validation - DefaultValue validation ## Update ```ts PASS test/integration/metadata/suites/field-metadata/update-one-field-metadata-select.integration-spec.ts (41.054 s) Field metadata select update tests group ✓ Update should succeed with provided option id (2565 ms) ✓ Update should succeed with valid default value (1469 ms) ✓ Update should succeed with various options id (1257 ms) ✓ Update should succeed without option id (1286 ms) ✓ Update should trim option values (1366 ms) ✓ Update should succeed with default value and no options (1122 ms) ✓ Update should fail with unknown default value and no options (1075 ms) ✓ Update should fail with only white spaces id (1195 ms) ✓ Update should fail with empty string id (1058 ms) ✓ Update should fail with null id (1066 ms) ✓ Update should fail with not a string id (1098 ms) ✓ Update should fail with too long id (1373 ms) ✓ Update should fail with only white spaces label (1034 ms) ✓ Update should fail with empty string label (1057 ms) ✓ Update should fail with null label (1100 ms) ✓ Update should fail with not a string label (1144 ms) ✓ Update should fail with too long label (1273 ms) ✓ Update should fail with only white spaces value (1385 ms) ✓ Update should fail with empty string value (1035 ms) ✓ Update should fail with null value (1068 ms) ✓ Update should fail with not a string value (1021 ms) ✓ Update should fail with too long value (1134 ms) ✓ Update should fail with invalid option id (1137 ms) ✓ Update should fail with empty options (1238 ms) ✓ Update should fail with invalid option value format (1104 ms) ✓ Update should fail with comma in option label (1004 ms) ✓ Update should fail with duplicated option values (1015 ms) ✓ Update should fail with duplicated option ids (1079 ms) ✓ Update should fail with duplicated option positions (1266 ms) ✓ Update should fail with duplicated trimmed option values (1220 ms) ✓ Update should fail with undefined option label (1029 ms) ✓ Update should fail with an invalid default value (1142 ms) ✓ Update should fail with an unknown default value (1081 ms) ✓ Update should fail with undefined option value (1086 ms) Test Suites: 1 passed, 1 total Tests: 34 passed, 34 total Snapshots: 28 passed, 28 total Time: 41.079 s ``` ## Create ```ts PASS test/integration/metadata/suites/field-metadata/create-one-field-metadata-select.integration-spec.ts (38.292 s) Field metadata select creation tests group ✓ Create should succeed with provided option id (2096 ms) ✓ Create should succeed with valid default value (1316 ms) ✓ Create should succeed with various options id (1113 ms) ✓ Create should succeed without option id (1378 ms) ✓ Create should trim option values (1296 ms) ✓ Create should fail with only white spaces id (1000 ms) ✓ Create should fail with empty string id (1325 ms) ✓ Create should fail with null id (1060 ms) ✓ Create should fail with not a string id (1142 ms) ✓ Create should fail with too long id (1321 ms) ✓ Create should fail with only white spaces label (999 ms) ✓ Create should fail with empty string label (1163 ms) ✓ Create should fail with null label (1198 ms) ✓ Create should fail with not a string label (1678 ms) ✓ Create should fail with too long label (1527 ms) ✓ Create should fail with only white spaces value (1200 ms) ✓ Create should fail with empty string value (1102 ms) ✓ Create should fail with null value (1037 ms) ✓ Create should fail with not a string value (1462 ms) ✓ Create should fail with too long value (896 ms) ✓ Create should fail with invalid option id (997 ms) ✓ Create should fail with empty options (1058 ms) ✓ Create should fail with invalid option value format (1190 ms) ✓ Create should fail with comma in option label (1142 ms) ✓ Create should fail with duplicated option values (872 ms) ✓ Create should fail with duplicated option ids (860 ms) ✓ Create should fail with duplicated option positions (1002 ms) ✓ Create should fail with duplicated trimmed option values (1336 ms) ✓ Create should fail with undefined option label (754 ms) ✓ Create should fail with an invalid default value (696 ms) ✓ Create should fail with an unknown default value (678 ms) ✓ Create should fail with undefined option value (699 ms) ✓ Create should fail with null options (720 ms) ✓ Create should fail with undefined options (686 ms) Test Suites: 1 passed, 1 total Tests: 34 passed, 34 total Snapshots: 29 passed, 29 total Time: 38.314 s ``` ## Conclusion As always any suggestions are welcomed ! Please let me know ## Discussion about validation governance ### Front Front side will be dealing with zod validations schema that he will handle and maintain by himself ### Back validation instances - Validation hold through DTO declarations ( run by yoga through the resolvers ) - Server programmatic validation and exceptions handling ( run through the services ) For this refactor/fix we decided to stick to the current implementation only touching the `Server programmatic validation and exceptions handling` we will handle validation centralization when we will onboard the `nestjs-query` deprecation/integration refactor. ### Vision In the best of the world we could think of an intermediary model that will handle and take responsibility of the validation decorators that would be run programmatically through the service, Yoga would still consume it ? then we would need to have enough grain in the service to know the input has already validated ## Notes Introduced zod back side in order to handle very atomic and primitive validation
The #1 Open-Source CRM
🌐 Website · 📚 Documentation · 
Roadmap · 
Discord · 
Figma
Installation
See:
🚀 Self-hosting
🖥️ Local Setup
Does the world need another CRM?
We built Twenty for three reasons:
CRMs are too expensive, and users are trapped. Companies use locked-in customer data to hike prices. It shouldn't be that way.
A fresh start is required to build a better experience. We can learn from past mistakes and craft a cohesive experience inspired by new UX patterns from tools like Notion, Airtable or Linear.
We believe in Open-source and community. Hundreds of developers are already building Twenty together. Once we have plugin capabilities, a whole ecosystem will grow around it.
What You Can Do With Twenty
We're currently developing Twenty's beta version.
Please feel free to flag any specific needs you have by creating an issue.
Below are a few features we have implemented to date:
- Add, filter, sort, edit, and track customers
- Create one or several opportunities for each company
- See rich notes tasks displayed in a timeline
- Create tasks on records
- Navigate quickly through the app using keyboard shortcuts and search
Add, filter, sort, edit, and track customers:
Create one or several opportunities for each company:
Track deals effortlessly with the email integration:
Tailor your data model to meet business needs:
See rich notes displayed in a timeline:
Create tasks on records
Navigate quickly through the app using keyboard shortcuts and search:
Connect your CRM to all your tools through our APIs and Webhooks.
Stack
- TypeScript
- Nx
- NestJS, with BullMQ, PostgreSQL, Redis
- React, with Recoil, Emotion and Lingui
Thanks
Thanks to these amazing services that we use and recommend for UI testing (Chromatic), code review (Greptile), catching bugs (Sentry) and translating (Crowdin).
Join the Community
- Star the repo
- Subscribe to releases (watch -> custom -> releases)
- Follow us on Twitter or LinkedIn
- Join our Discord
- Improve translations on Crowdin
- Contributions are, of course, most welcome!