| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Feature/api quota support + current_user null pattern
|
|
Bugfix/5549 prefer client signup
|
|
Bugfix/5552 recover from invalid tickets
|
|
|
|
|
|
when rendered from teh create action due to an error user_id param will
sometimes be an empty string. We should still avoid rendering the
navigation because the path's can not be resolved without a user_id.
|
|
|
|
The auto_ticket_path is referenced from the tickets_controller like this:
respond_with(@ticket, :location => auto_ticket_path(@ticket))
While this only uses the location parameter when the ticket is valid it will still attampt to calculate it if not. During the create action this will lead to crashes because the ticket_path can not be calculated for a ticket without an id.
This led to https://leap.se/code/issues/5552 and probably
https://leap.se/code/issues/5545.
|
|
|
|
|
|
let's devide the partials rather than having super specific parameters (on_user_page)
|
|
|
|
Test/nagios test signup
|
|
cost -> rate
quota -> storage
|
|
if neither limited nor unlimited certs are allowed there will be no prefix. Not sure if this is desired - but it's the way things used to be before the refactoring
|
|
The changes to the configuration required some non minor changes to the platform and also added some flexibility we don't require yet - and thus some new possibilities for errors.
So instead we still use the allow_..._certs and ..._cert_prefix options.
They basically provide the framework in which service levels can operate.
The service level configuration will not include the cert prefix anymore.
It only states if the service level is rate limited or not.
This avoids conflicts between the two configuration options.
I also removed the anonymous service level entirely.
It was also turning a boolean decision (do we provide anonymous eip or not) into something way more complex. Instead I added the AnonymousServiceLevel class to handle the corner cases for people who are not logged in.
Furthermore i renamed the UnauthenticatedUser to AnonymousUser so it matches the Anonymous Service Level nicely. It's also shorter and more intuitive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Null Pattern for current_user - use it to get rid of some conditionals
|
|
this still allows us to do current_user.service_level.
Have not gone through the rest of the code yet.
Only made sure logged_in? now tests for is_a? User instead of !!current_user
|
|
:api/service will return a hash of the current users service level
This is failiing if the user is not logged in. Instead it should return the service description for an anonymous user.
|
|
they have response.json as a dict instead of response.json()
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
now the webapp_login test looks nice and clean. soledad next.
|
|
|
|
nagios_test.run takes a function and executes it.
If it returns nothing or 0 and OK nagios message is printed.
If it returns sth. else this will be printed a a warning
If it raises an exception that will result in a CRITICAL report.
This way we can keep the nagios things outside the test cases and just write simple functions that either return 0, a warnign or raise a meaningful exception
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refactor/engines
|
|
|
|
it may not have been required before the RackTest support class.
|
|
|
|
Also renamed help to support so it's harder to confuse it with documentation
|
|
They are currently using fake_braintree. I think this is not a good approach for integration tests. It's a fake - we should test against braintrees test api. However that requires getting an api key that we want to keep outside the repository. So these test can only run on travis if we manage to setup secret values in .travis.yml - which has been failing so far.
So for now i moved the broken billing integration tests to billing/test/broken to move on.
|
|
they are still broken though.
|
|
|
|
cleaned up all the engine stuff that was never really used.
Afterwards there is not that much left that makes it into the toplevel.
|
|
prevent recursive loadign of test/factories.rb ** can be empty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
now we only include some engines - we don't build the whole webapp based on them. Reflecting this in the documentation.
|
|
We used to keep them separated so one could require some engines without using the full webapp. We've never really supported this though and probably never will.
|
|
some message tests are failing for me right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
