GO-247 Allow filtering out threads with visible tags with query -label:* #90
Conversation
|
|
||
| with_text = query.to_s | ||
|
|
||
| query.to_s.scan(/(-?label):\(([^)]+)\)/).each do |match| | ||
| raise "unexpected label case" if match.length != 2 | ||
| query.to_s.scan(/(-?label):\(([^)]+)\)|(-label:\*)/).each do |match| |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ked si tu das takyto regular tak budes mat podporu aj pre bez zatvoriek aj * a vsetko najdes ako potrebujes a nemusis tu kuzlit. https://regex101.com/
((-?)label):(\(([^)]+)\)|([^ ]+)|\*)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jsuchal ok. upravim to teda takto. len tam tam vznika taka mensia haluz. kym -label:* ma specialny vyznam, tak label:* nema ziadny vyznam. za mna je to ok, ja len aby sa vedelo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
label:* asi znamena, ze to ma nejaky tag ale to by som asi neriesil.
| Tag.where(tenant_id: tenant_id, name: label_names).pluck(:id) | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| def self.visible_tag_ids(tenant_id) | ||
| Tag.where(tenant_id: tenant_id, visible: true).pluck(:id) | ||
| if label_names.find { |name| name == "*" }.present? | ||
| [true, Tag.where(tenant_id: tenant_id, visible: true).pluck(:id)] | ||
| else | ||
| ids = Tag.where(tenant_id: tenant_id, name: label_names).pluck(:id) | ||
| [ids.length == label_names.length, ids] | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nemalo by toto byt nad Tag ako nejake tenant.tags.find_by_names(names).pluck(:id) a do metody posielame tenant a nie tenant_id?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
moze byt aj tak. tak, ako to je tu, to ale mame prakticky vsade v XxxPolicy.
Admin::UserPolicy < Struct.new(:user) # to som spravil umelo prezjednodusenie
class Scope < Scope
def resolve
if @user.site_admin?
scope.all
else
scope.where(tenant_id: @user.tenant_id)
end
end
endv com vidis rozdiel to pisat tak, ako navrhujes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Za mna je best-practice
- specialne v pripadoch kedy sa obmedzuje viditelnost pouzivat parent asociaciu ako zaciatok
- primitive obsession - s idckami by sa malo babrat primarne na top level urovni, alebo v jasne definovanych interfacoch. Inak bude vsade
_ida.idnamiesto objektu samotneho. - je to domenovy jazyk, to vyssie je taky implementacny jazyk.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jsuchal nahradit to v tom Query za tenant je v pohode. len teda tu
https://github.com/solver-it-sro/govbox-pro/blob/main/app/models/searchable/message_thread.rb#L32
potrebujem tenant_id. a neviem ist cez tenant takto pekne, predoze tam mi prichadza uz nejaky scope. cize tam je jedina moznost mat tam fetch(:tenant).id (ak si tam teda nechcem posiet aj tenant a aj tenant_id).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Smerom na search je podla mna ok kontrakt cez idcka lebo to su ine domeny.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
tak nakoniec som tam nechal tenant, lebo som si uvedomil, ze where(tenant_id: tenant) pekne nacita id z daneho objektu.
| result = { tenant_id: Current.tenant } | ||
| result[:box_id] = Current.box if Current.box | ||
| result = { tenant: Current.tenant } | ||
| result[:box] = Current.box if Current.box | ||
| result[:tag_ids] = policy_scope(Tag).pluck(:id) unless Current.user.admin? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Myslim, ze tu podmienku mozeme vyhodit, momentalne adminom uz davame pristupy na vsetky tagy default, ze @luciajanikova ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| found_all, filter_tag_ids = label_names_to_tag_ids(tenant, filter_labels) | ||
| _, filter_out_tag_ids = label_names_to_tag_ids(tenant, filter_out_labels) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tu daj TODO, ze toto by sa dalo aj jednou query vybavit.
No description provided.