Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Apply Mentions everywhere #595

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Oct 22, 2024
Merged

Apply Mentions everywhere #595

merged 18 commits into from
Oct 22, 2024

Conversation

chiragchhatrala
Copy link
Collaborator

@chiragchhatrala chiragchhatrala commented Oct 17, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

  • New Features

    • Introduced a new email notification migration command for seamless integration with the new email system.
    • Added a MentionParser class to enhance mention functionality across various components.
    • New Vue components: MentionInput, TextBlock, FormSubmissionFormatter, and QuillyEditor to improve user input and submission formatting.
    • Added a new FormEmailNotification class for handling email notifications for form submissions.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Enhanced validation for redirect URLs in forms to ensure only valid URLs are processed.
  • Improvements

    • Updated email integration logic to handle new fields for email notifications.
    • Refined Slack and Discord integrations to improve message formatting.
    • Streamlined help button implementation in the integration wrapper.
    • Enhanced the RichTextAreaInput component to support mention capabilities.
  • Removals

    • Deprecated the SubmissionConfirmationIntegration and related components to streamline email notifications.
    • Removed the confirmation-submission-notification email template and associated tests.
    • Deleted the submission-notification email template and related confirmation email tests.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 17, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes introduced in this pull request encompass the addition of a new console command for migrating email notifications, modifications to existing classes and components related to email and submission integrations, and the removal of outdated files. Key enhancements include the introduction of a MentionParser for better handling of mentions in email content and the restructuring of validation rules for URLs. Additionally, new Vue components have been created to support mention functionality in user interfaces, while several existing components and tests have been updated or deleted to reflect these changes.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php Added EmailNotificationMigration class with methods for migrating email notifications.
api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php Updated redirect URL handling in answer method to validate URLs using MentionParser.
api/app/Requests/UserFormRequest.php Modified validation rules for redirect_url to allow nullable strings.
api/app/Integrations/Handlers/DiscordIntegration.php Updated getWebhookData method to improve message formatting using MentionParser.
api/app/Integrations/Handlers/EmailIntegration.php Significant changes to validation rules and recipient handling logic in handle method.
api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SlackIntegration.php Enhanced getWebhookData method for message formatting.
api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SubmissionConfirmationIntegration.php Deleted class responsible for confirmation emails.
api/app/Mail/Forms/SubmissionConfirmationMail.php Deleted class for handling confirmation emails.
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php Renamed from FormSubmissionNotification with updated constructor and methods for email handling.
api/app/Open/MentionParser.php Added MentionParser class for parsing mentions in HTML content.
api/app/Service/HtmlPurifier/OpenFormsHtmlDefinition.php Added OpenFormsHtmlDefinition class for custom HTMLPurifier attributes.
api/config/purify.php Updated to use OpenFormsHtmlDefinition for HTMLPurifier configuration.
api/resources/data/forms/integrations.json Removed "submission_confirmation" integration from configuration.
api/resources/views/mail/form/confirmation-submission-notification.blade.php Deleted Blade template for confirmation emails.
api/resources/views/mail/form/email-notification.blade.php Introduced new Blade template for email notifications.
api/resources/views/mail/form/submission-notification.blade.php Deleted Blade template for submission notifications.
api/tests/Feature/Forms/ConfirmationEmailTest.php Deleted tests for confirmation email functionality.
api/tests/Feature/Forms/CustomSmtpTest.php Updated test case to reflect broader email functionality.
api/tests/Feature/Forms/EmailNotificationTest.php Added tests for FormEmailNotification functionality.
api/tests/Unit/EmailNotificationMigrationTest.php Introduced unit tests for EmailNotificationMigration command.
api/tests/Unit/Service/Forms/MentionParserTest.php Added unit tests for MentionParser functionality.
client/components/forms/MentionInput.vue Added new Vue component for mention input.
client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue Replaced VueEditor with QuillyEditor component.
client/components/forms/TextBlock.vue Introduced new Vue component for text blocks.
client/components/forms/components/FormSubmissionFormatter.js Added class for formatting form submission data.
client/components/forms/components/MentionDropdown.vue Added Vue component for mention dropdown functionality.
client/components/forms/components/QuillyEditor.vue Added Vue component for Quill rich text editor.
client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue Introduced <TextBlock> component and modified form submission handling.
client/composables/useParseMention.js Added function for processing HTML content with mentions.
client/data/forms/integrations.json Removed "submission_confirmation" integration from JSON configuration.
client/lib/quill/quillMentionExtension.js Added custom mention extension for Quill editor.
client/package.json Updated dependencies, adding Quill and removing Vue3 editor.

Possibly related PRs

  • confirmation email integration fixes #434: The changes in the main PR involve migrating email notifications, which relates to the confirmation email integration fixes that also deal with email handling and validation.
  • apply first submission modal changes #584: The modifications in the main PR regarding the EmailNotificationMigration class and its methods are relevant to the changes in the PublicFormController, which now includes logic for handling submissions and their associated notifications.

🐰 "In the fields where the data flows,
A new command for emails grows.
With mentions parsed and rules refined,
Our forms now better intertwined.
Hooray for changes, bright and bold,
In rabbit's burrow, stories told!" 🐇


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 38d3476 and b155c98.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 45

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (37)
api/tests/Feature/Forms/FormIntegrationEventTest.php (1)

13-19: LGTM! Consider adding assertions for new email settings.

The changes to the $data array provide a more comprehensive email notification configuration, which aligns well with the updated functionality. This update improves the test coverage by including more detailed settings.

To further enhance the test, consider adding assertions to verify that these new email settings are correctly stored in the created form integration. This could be done by fetching the created integration and asserting its settings match the input data.

client/components/open/integrations/DiscordIntegration.vue (1)

32-35: LGTM! Consider minor formatting adjustment for consistency.

The addition of the :form="form" prop to the notifications-message-actions component is consistent with the PR objectives and aligns with the changes described in the AI summary. This modification likely enables the component to access form data, which may be necessary for implementing mention functionality.

For better readability and consistency with other components in this file, consider placing each prop on a new line:

<notifications-message-actions
  v-model="integrationData.settings"
  :form="form"
/>
api/tests/Feature/Forms/FormIntegrationTest.php (1)

13-19: LGTM! Consider adding a test for non-null 'reply_to'.

The changes to the $data array provide more granular control over email notifications, aligning well with the PR objective of "Apply Mentions everywhere". The new structure allows for customization of email content, sender details, and control over included data, which is a significant improvement.

Consider adding an additional test case or modifying this one to include a non-null 'reply_to' value. This would ensure that both scenarios (with and without reply-to) are covered in the test suite.

Example:

'reply_to' => '[email protected]'
client/components/open/integrations/components/NotificationsMessageActions.vue (2)

3-10: LGTM! Consider adding input validation.

The addition of the MentionInput component enhances the functionality by allowing customization of the notification message with mentions. This is a good improvement to the user experience.

Consider adding input validation to ensure the message meets any required format or length constraints. This could be done by passing a rules prop to the MentionInput component if it supports validation, or by adding a custom validator in the component's logic.


86-98: LGTM! Consider extracting the default message to a constant.

The modification to the created lifecycle hook ensures that the message property is initialized with a default value of 'New form submission'. This aligns well with the new MentionInput component in the template.

Consider extracting the default message 'New form submission' to a constant at the top of the file or in a separate constants file. This would make it easier to maintain and potentially reuse the default message if needed elsewhere.

Example:

const DEFAULT_NOTIFICATION_MESSAGE = 'New form submission';

// Then in the created hook:
this.compVal[keyname] = DEFAULT_NOTIFICATION_MESSAGE;
api/tests/Unit/EmailNotificationMigrationTest.php (3)

15-43: LGTM: Comprehensive test for email integration update.

The test case effectively covers the email integration update process, including user simulation, integration creation, and result verification. The assertions are thorough and check both the integration_id and the structure of the data array.

Consider adding an assertion to verify that the integration status remains unchanged after the update. This could be done by adding:

->status->toBe(FormIntegration::STATUS_ACTIVE)

to the expect chain.


45-80: LGTM: Thorough test for submission confirmation integration update.

This test case effectively covers the submission confirmation integration update process. It properly simulates the necessary setup, performs the update, and verifies the results, including the transformation of the integration_id and the structure of the data array.

Consider adding the following assertions to make the test even more robust:

  1. Verify that the email property is successfully retrieved:
expect($emailProperty)->not->toBeNull();
  1. Check that the integration status remains unchanged:
->status->toBe(FormIntegration::STATUS_ACTIVE)
  1. Assert that the 'notifications_include_submission' field is correctly transformed to 'include_submission_data':
->data->toHaveKey('include_submission_data')
->data->not->toHaveKey('notifications_include_submission')

1-80: Overall: Well-structured and comprehensive test suite.

The test file provides good coverage for the EmailNotificationMigration command, testing both email integration and submission confirmation scenarios. The use of dynamic properties and different integration types demonstrates adaptability to various use cases.

To further enhance the test suite, consider adding the following:

  1. Edge case tests, such as:

    • Updating an integration with missing or invalid data
    • Handling of special characters in email addresses or content
  2. Error scenario tests, for example:

    • Attempting to update a non-existent integration
    • Handling of database connection errors
  3. A test case for updating multiple integrations in succession to ensure consistent behavior across updates.

These additions would provide even more robust coverage of the EmailNotificationMigration command's functionality.

api/tests/Unit/Service/Forms/MentionParserTest.php (4)

48-56: LGTM with a suggestion: Good coverage of array values

This test case effectively covers the scenario of handling array values for mentions. The expected output correctly shows the joining of array elements with commas.

Consider adding a test case with an empty array value to ensure proper handling of that edge case as well.


68-76: LGTM with a suggestion: Good coverage of UTF-8 handling

This test case effectively ensures that the parser can handle UTF-8 characters correctly. The use of Japanese characters in both the content and the replacement value is a good choice for testing UTF-8 handling.

Consider adding more test cases with different UTF-8 character sets (e.g., Arabic, Cyrillic, Emoji) to ensure comprehensive Unicode support.


78-86: LGTM with a suggestion: Good coverage of content without paragraph tags

This test case effectively ensures that the parser can handle content without surrounding paragraph tags. The inclusion of additional attributes on the span element is good for testing attribute preservation.

Consider adding an assertion to verify that the other attributes of the span element (e.g., contenteditable="false") are not present in the output, as they should be removed along with the mention span.


1-86: Overall: Excellent test coverage with minor suggestions for improvement

This test suite for the MentionParser is comprehensive and well-organized. It covers a wide range of scenarios including basic functionality, multiple mentions, fallback behavior, array values, HTML structure preservation, UTF-8 handling, and content without paragraph tags.

To further enhance the test suite, consider adding the following test cases:

  1. Test with an empty array value for a mention.
  2. Test with different UTF-8 character sets (e.g., Arabic, Cyrillic, Emoji).
  3. Test to ensure that all attributes of the mention span are removed in the output.
  4. Test with nested mentions (if supported by the parser).
  5. Test with malformed HTML input to ensure robust error handling.

These additions would make an already strong test suite even more comprehensive.

api/tests/Feature/Forms/EmailNotificationTest.php (4)

7-30: LGTM! Consider enhancing the email content verification.

The test case effectively covers the basic functionality of sending an email with submitted data. It properly sets up the test environment, generates form submission data, and verifies the email subject and partial content.

To make the test more robust, consider adding assertions for other integration data fields in the email content, such as sender name and reply-to address. This will ensure that all configured email parameters are correctly applied.


32-71: LGTM! Consider enhancing email content verification and error handling.

The test case effectively covers the scenario where an email should be sent based on form data. It properly sets up the test environment, creates an email integration with dynamic recipient using mentions, and verifies that the email is sent to the correct address.

Consider the following improvements:

  1. Add assertions to verify the content of the sent email, including subject, body, and other relevant fields.
  2. Test error handling scenarios, such as when the mention field is not found in the form data.
  3. Consider adding a test case for multiple recipients or CC/BCC functionality if supported.

73-100: LGTM! Consider clarifying the test scenario and improving setup.

The test case effectively covers the scenario where an email should not be sent. It properly sets up the test environment, simulates a form submission, and verifies that no email notification is sent.

Consider the following improvements:

  1. Add a comment or rename the test to clarify why an email is not needed in this scenario (e.g., no email integration configured).
  2. Differentiate the setup from the previous test case to make it clear why this case doesn't trigger an email. For example, you could explicitly show that no email integration is created for this form.
  3. Consider adding assertions to verify that the form submission is still successful and saved, even though no email is sent.

1-100: Consider improving overall test file structure and organization.

The test file effectively covers three distinct scenarios for email notifications in form submissions. Each test case is well-isolated and uses appropriate Laravel testing utilities and PHPUnit assertions.

Consider the following improvements to enhance the overall structure and maintainability of the test file:

  1. Organize imports: Group and sort the use statements at the top of the file for better readability.

  2. Use a test class: Wrap the test cases in a PHPUnit test class, which allows for better organization and the use of setup/teardown methods.

  3. Extract common setup code: Move repeated setup code (e.g., creating users, workspaces, and forms) into setup methods or helper functions to reduce duplication.

  4. Add docblocks: Include PHPDoc comments for each test case to clearly describe the scenario being tested.

Here's an example of how you could structure the file:

<?php

namespace Tests\Feature\Forms;

use App\Events\Forms\FormSubmitted;
use App\Notifications\Forms\FormEmailNotification;
use Illuminate\Foundation\Testing\RefreshDatabase;
use Illuminate\Notifications\AnonymousNotifiable;
use Illuminate\Support\Facades\Notification;
use Tests\Helpers\FormSubmissionDataFactory;
use Tests\TestCase;

class EmailNotificationTest extends TestCase
{
    use RefreshDatabase;

    protected $user;
    protected $workspace;
    protected $form;

    protected function setUp(): void
    {
        parent::setUp();
        $this->user = $this->actingAsUser();
        $this->workspace = $this->createUserWorkspace($this->user);
        $this->form = $this->createForm($this->user, $this->workspace);
    }

    /** @test */
    public function it_sends_email_with_the_submitted_data()
    {
        // Test implementation
    }

    /** @test */
    public function it_sends_email_if_needed()
    {
        // Test implementation
    }

    /** @test */
    public function it_does_not_send_email_if_not_needed()
    {
        // Test implementation
    }
}

This structure will make the tests more organized, easier to maintain, and follow Laravel's testing best practices.

api/config/purify.php (2)

43-43: LGTM. Consider updating documentation for new attributes.

The addition of mention-related attributes (mention, mention-field-id, mention-field-name, mention-fallback) to the allowed attributes for span elements aligns with the PR objective of applying mentions everywhere.

Consider updating any relevant documentation to reflect these new allowed attributes and their purpose in the mention system.


89-89: LGTM. Consider adding a test for the custom definition.

The change to use OpenFormsHtmlDefinition::class is consistent with the import statement change and supports the customization of HTML purification for mentions.

Consider adding a test to ensure that the OpenFormsHtmlDefinition class is correctly applied during the HTML purification process, especially for mention-related elements and attributes.

client/data/blocks_types.json (1)

Line range hint 1-181: Consider adding a comment explaining the is_input property.

The addition of the is_input property is consistent and correct across all block types. However, it might be beneficial to add a comment at the beginning of the file explaining the purpose and usage of this new property. This would help future maintainers understand its significance and how it should be used.

api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (1)

105-112: LGTM: Improved redirect URL handling with validation

The changes enhance the handling of redirect URLs by introducing parsing with MentionParser and validating the resulting URL. This improves both flexibility and security. The response structure update correctly reflects these changes.

Minor suggestion for clarity:
Consider extracting the URL parsing and validation logic into a separate private method for better readability and potential reuse.

Example:

private function parseAndValidateRedirectUrl($redirectUrl, $formattedData)
{
    if (!$redirectUrl) {
        return null;
    }
    $parsedUrl = (new MentionParser($redirectUrl, $formattedData))->parse();
    return filter_var($parsedUrl, FILTER_VALIDATE_URL) ? $parsedUrl : null;
}

Then in the answer method:

$redirectUrl = $this->parseAndValidateRedirectUrl($request->form->redirect_url, $formattedData);

This refactoring would make the answer method more concise and easier to understand.

Also applies to: 117-119

client/components/pages/pricing/SubscriptionModal.vue (2)

Line range hint 332-516: Enhanced subscription flow and user experience

The changes in the script setup section significantly improve the subscription process. The new logic handles different scenarios (new subscriptions and upgrades) more effectively, provides better error handling, and integrates with various analytics services.

One suggestion for improvement:

Consider extracting the analytics event logging into a separate function to improve code readability and maintainability. For example:

+const logSubscriptionEvent = (eventData) => {
+  try {
+    useAmplitude().logEvent('subscribed', eventData)
+    useCrisp().pushEvent('subscribed', eventData)
+    useGtm().trackEvent({ event: 'subscribed', ...eventData })
+    if (import.meta.client && window.rewardful) {
+      window.rewardful('convert', { email: user.value.email })
+    }
+    console.log('Subscription registered 🎊')
+  } catch (error) {
+    console.error('Failed to register subscription event 😔', error)
+  }
+}

// Replace the existing try-catch block with:
+logSubscriptionEvent(eventData)

Line range hint 468-499: Improved flexibility in trial handling and checkout process

The saveDetails function now supports custom trial durations and includes currency information in the checkout process. This enhances the flexibility of the subscription system and improves tracking of extended trials.

Suggestion for improvement:

Consider adding more specific error handling for different types of errors that might occur during the checkout process. For example:

 opnFetch(
   `/subscription/new/${
     currentPlan.value
   }/${
     !isYearly.value ? 'monthly' : 'yearly'
   }/checkout/with-trial?${
     new URLSearchParams(params).toString()}`
 )
   .then((data) => {
     window.open(data.checkout_url, '_blank')
   })
   .catch((error) => {
-    useAlert().error(error.data.message)
+    if (error.response && error.response.status === 422) {
+      useAlert().error('Invalid input. Please check your details and try again.')
+    } else if (error.response && error.response.status === 403) {
+      useAlert().error('You do not have permission to perform this action.')
+    } else {
+      useAlert().error('An unexpected error occurred. Please try again later.')
+    }
     loading.value = false
   })
   .finally(() => {
+    loading.value = false
   })

This will provide more specific feedback to the user based on the type of error encountered.

api/resources/views/mail/form/email-notification.blade.php (1)

17-17: Use HTML <hr> tag for consistent email formatting.

The plain text separator line may not render consistently across different email clients:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consider using an HTML horizontal rule for better formatting:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+<hr>
client/composables/useParseMention.js (1)

3-39: Add unit tests for 'useParseMention' function

Consider adding unit tests for the useParseMention function to cover various scenarios:

  • mentionsAllowed being true and false.
  • Elements with and without mention, mention-field-id, and mention-fallback attributes.
  • Cases where value is an array, a single value, or undefined.
  • Ensuring elements are correctly modified or removed based on the data.

This will help ensure the function behaves as expected under different conditions.

client/components/forms/components/QuillyEditor.vue (2)

62-64: Use Quill's API to Retrieve Content Instead of Accessing innerHTML Directly

Accessing quillInstance.root.innerHTML directly may not yield consistent results due to Quill's internal formatting and may include unintended HTML elements. To retrieve the editor's content reliably, consider using Quill's provided methods.

You can update the code as follows:

if (!isInternalChange) {
- const html = quillInstance.root.innerHTML
+ const html = quillInstance.root.innerHTML // If HTML is required
+ // Alternatively, use:
+ // const delta = quillInstance.getContents()
+ // const text = quillInstance.getText()
  emit('text-change', { delta, oldContents, source })
  emit('update:modelValue', html)
}

Choose the method that best fits your use case—whether you need HTML, Delta, or plain text.


90-97: Consider Properly Destroying the Quill Instance on Component Unmount

While you are removing event listeners and setting quillInstance to null, Quill does not provide a built-in destroy method. However, it's good practice to ensure all resources are cleaned up to prevent memory leaks.

You might want to reset the editor's content and remove any DOM references:

onBeforeUnmount(() => {
  if (quillInstance) {
    quillInstance.off('selection-change')
    quillInstance.off('text-change')
    quillInstance.off('editor-change')
+   quillInstance.root.innerHTML = ''
  }
  quillInstance = null
})

This ensures that the editor's content is cleared when the component is unmounted.

api/app/Integrations/Handlers/EmailIntegration.php (1)

65-70: Validate email addresses comprehensively

Currently, email addresses are validated using filter_var with FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL. This might not cover all valid email formats, especially with internationalized email addresses. Consider using a more comprehensive email validation library if necessary.

Alternatively, clarify if international email support is not required for this application.

api/app/Open/MentionParser.php (1)

65-85: Remove unused private method replaceMentions()

The method replaceMentions() is not used within the class. Consider removing it to keep the codebase clean and maintainable.

api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php (2)

39-39: Improve the logging message for clarity

In the handle method, the log message could be more descriptive to enhance readability during the migration process.

Consider updating the log message:

- $this->line('Process For Form: ' . $integration->form_id . ' - ' . $integration->integration_id . ' - ' . $integration->id);
+ $this->line('Processing Integration ID: ' . $integration->id . ' (Type: ' . $integration->integration_id . ') for Form ID: ' . $integration->form_id);

91-91: Simplify the return statement in getRespondentEmail

The return statement can be simplified since first() will return null if the collection is empty.

Apply this diff for brevity:

- return $emailFields->count() > 0 ? $emailFields->first() : null;
+ return $emailFields->first();
client/components/forms/components/MentionDropdown.vue (2)

15-19: Add an accessible label to the 'Fallback value' input

The input field for the fallback value lacks an associated label, which can cause accessibility issues for users relying on screen readers. To improve accessibility, please add a visually hidden label associated with the input.

Apply this change to include an accessible label:

+ <label for="fallbackValueInput" class="sr-only">Fallback value</label>
  <input
+   id="fallbackValueInput"
    v-model="fallbackValue"
    class="p-1 mb-2 text-sm w-1/2 border rounded-md hover:bg-gray-50"
    placeholder="Fallback value"
  >

This uses the sr-only class to make the label available to screen readers without affecting the visual layout.


5-5: Review the usage of the 'h-0' class on the UPopover component

The h-0 class sets the height to zero, which might not be necessary and could potentially cause layout issues or unintended side effects. Please verify if this class is required, and remove it if it serves no purpose.

api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (1)

139-139: Simplify email validation casting

The casting to (bool) in the validateEmail method is redundant since filter_var with FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL already returns a boolean.

Consider simplifying the return statement:

 public static function validateEmail($email): bool
 {
-    return (bool)filter_var($email, FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL);
+    return filter_var($email, FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL) !== false;
 }
client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (1)

25-25: Ensure unique and reliable keys for the QuillyEditor component

Using :key="id + placeholder" may result in non-unique or unpredictable keys, especially if id or placeholder are undefined or not unique. This could lead to rendering issues or unexpected behavior. Consider using a more stable and unique key, such as :key="id" or a combination that guarantees uniqueness.

client/components/forms/MentionInput.vue (1)

114-117: Hardcoded strings should be localized for internationalization (i18n)

The strings 'Upgrade to Pro' and 'Upgrade to Pro to use mentions' are hardcoded. For better internationalization support, consider using localization practices to enable translation.

Apply this diff to utilize localization:

-  subscriptionModalStore.setModalContent('Upgrade to Pro', 'Upgrade to Pro to use mentions')
+  subscriptionModalStore.setModalContent(t('upgradeToProTitle'), t('upgradeToProMessage'))

Ensure that the localization keys upgradeToProTitle and upgradeToProMessage are defined in your localization files.

client/components/open/integrations/EmailIntegration.vue (2)

50-50: Add comma for clarity in help text

Consider adding a comma for better readability.

Apply this change:

-      help="If enabled the email will contain form submission answers"
+      help="If enabled, the email will contain form submission answers"

58-58: Add comma for clarity in help text

Consider adding a comma for better readability.

Apply this change:

-      help="If enabled the email will contain hidden fields"
+      help="If enabled, the email will contain hidden fields"
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between fa8c264 and 0213f58.

📒 Files selected for processing (45)
  • api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php (1 hunks)
  • api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (2 hunks)
  • api/app/Http/Requests/UserFormRequest.php (1 hunks)
  • api/app/Integrations/Handlers/DiscordIntegration.php (4 hunks)
  • api/app/Integrations/Handlers/EmailIntegration.php (2 hunks)
  • api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SlackIntegration.php (3 hunks)
  • api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SubmissionConfirmationIntegration.php (0 hunks)
  • api/app/Mail/Forms/SubmissionConfirmationMail.php (0 hunks)
  • api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (5 hunks)
  • api/app/Open/MentionParser.php (1 hunks)
  • api/app/Service/HtmlPurifier/OpenFormsHtmlDefinition.php (1 hunks)
  • api/config/purify.php (3 hunks)
  • api/resources/data/forms/integrations.json (0 hunks)
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/confirmation-submission-notification.blade.php (0 hunks)
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/email-notification.blade.php (1 hunks)
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/submission-notification.blade.php (0 hunks)
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/ConfirmationEmailTest.php (0 hunks)
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/CustomSmtpTest.php (4 hunks)
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/EmailNotificationTest.php (1 hunks)
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/FormIntegrationEventTest.php (1 hunks)
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/FormIntegrationTest.php (1 hunks)
  • api/tests/Unit/EmailNotificationMigrationTest.php (1 hunks)
  • api/tests/Unit/Service/Forms/MentionParserTest.php (1 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/MentionInput.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (3 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/TextBlock.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/components/FormSubmissionFormatter.js (1 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/components/MentionDropdown.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/components/QuillyEditor.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/global/Modal.vue (2 hunks)
  • client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue (3 hunks)
  • client/components/open/forms/components/FirstSubmissionModal.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/open/forms/components/form-components/FormSubmissionSettings.vue (2 hunks)
  • client/components/open/integrations/DiscordIntegration.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/open/integrations/EmailIntegration.vue (2 hunks)
  • client/components/open/integrations/SlackIntegration.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/open/integrations/SubmissionConfirmationIntegration.vue (0 hunks)
  • client/components/open/integrations/components/NotificationsMessageActions.vue (3 hunks)
  • client/components/pages/pricing/SubscriptionModal.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/composables/lib/vForm/Form.js (1 hunks)
  • client/composables/useParseMention.js (1 hunks)
  • client/data/blocks_types.json (1 hunks)
  • client/data/forms/integrations.json (0 hunks)
  • client/lib/quill/quillMentionExtension.js (1 hunks)
  • client/package.json (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (8)
  • api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SubmissionConfirmationIntegration.php
  • api/app/Mail/Forms/SubmissionConfirmationMail.php
  • api/resources/data/forms/integrations.json
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/confirmation-submission-notification.blade.php
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/submission-notification.blade.php
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/ConfirmationEmailTest.php
  • client/components/open/integrations/SubmissionConfirmationIntegration.vue
  • client/data/forms/integrations.json
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (3)
Learnt from: JhumanJ
PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561
File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28
Timestamp: 2024-10-09T13:56:16.694Z
Learning: The `$mailer` parameter in the `FormSubmissionNotification` constructor should be typed as `string`.
Learnt from: JhumanJ
PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561
File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28
Timestamp: 2024-09-05T18:47:04.319Z
Learning: The `$mailer` parameter in the `FormSubmissionNotification` constructor should be typed as `string`.
Learnt from: JhumanJ
PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561
File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28
Timestamp: 2024-10-09T13:56:17.547Z
Learning: The `$mailer` parameter in the `FormSubmissionNotification` constructor should be typed as `string`.
🪛 Biome
client/lib/quill/quillMentionExtension.js

[error] 11-11: Using super in a static context can be confusing.

super refers to a parent class.
Unsafe fix: Use the class name instead.

(lint/complexity/noThisInStatic)

🔇 Additional comments (70)
client/components/forms/TextBlock.vue (3)

8-25: Props are well-defined, but clarification needed

The props are well-structured with appropriate types and default values. However, could you please clarify the distinction between form and formData props? It's not immediately clear how these two props differ in their usage within the component.

To better understand the usage of form and formData props, let's search for their usage in other components:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage of form and formData props in other components

echo "Searching for usage of 'form' prop:"
rg --type vue -A 5 'props.form'

echo "Searching for usage of 'formData' prop:"
rg --type vue -A 5 'props.formData'

26-28: Document useParseMention and consider memoization

The processedContent computed property looks good, but there are a couple of suggestions:

  1. Please add a comment or documentation for the useParseMention function, explaining its purpose and parameters.
  2. Consider using useMemo instead of computed if the parsing operation is computationally expensive and you want to optimize performance by memoizing the result based on specific dependencies.

Let's check the implementation and usage of useParseMention:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check the implementation and usage of useParseMention

echo "Searching for useParseMention implementation:"
rg --type vue --type js -A 10 'function useParseMention|const useParseMention'

echo "Checking for useParseMention import in TextBlock.vue:"
rg --type vue -A 5 'import.*useParseMention' client/components/forms/TextBlock.vue

1-5: ⚠️ Potential issue

Caution: Potential XSS vulnerability with v-html

The use of v-html can lead to cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities if the content is not properly sanitized. Ensure that processedContent is thoroughly sanitized before rendering.

Consider the following improvements:

  1. Implement content sanitization in the useParseMention function or before assigning to processedContent.
  2. If possible, use Vue's template syntax instead of v-html for safer rendering.
  3. Add appropriate CSS classes or styles to the div for consistent styling across the application.

To verify the usage and sanitization of useParseMention, run the following script:

api/app/Service/HtmlPurifier/OpenFormsHtmlDefinition.php (3)

1-8: LGTM: Namespace and imports are correctly defined.

The namespace follows the PSR-4 autoloading standard, and the necessary classes are properly imported.


9-10: LGTM: Class definition is appropriate.

The class OpenFormsHtmlDefinition correctly implements the Definition interface, following the strategy pattern for HTML definition customization.


11-20: LGTM: Method implementation extends HTML5 definition and adds necessary attributes.

The apply method correctly extends the HTML5 definition and adds custom attributes for mention functionality, which aligns with the PR objective. However, please note the following:

  1. The use of the contenteditable attribute on span elements could have security implications if not properly handled in the frontend. Ensure that proper sanitization and validation are in place to prevent XSS attacks.

  2. Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of each custom attribute to improve code maintainability.

To ensure that the frontend properly handles the contenteditable attribute, please run the following script:

This script will help identify where the contenteditable attribute is used and if there are any sanitization or validation measures in place.

client/components/open/integrations/SlackIntegration.vue (1)

32-35: LGTM: New prop added to notifications-message-actions component

The addition of the :form="form" prop to the notifications-message-actions component looks good. This change allows the component to access the form data, which is consistent with other parts of the template where the form prop is used.

However, to ensure this change doesn't introduce any unintended side effects:

  1. Verify that the NotificationsMessageActions component is expecting and can handle this new form prop.
  2. Check if any updates to the component's logic or documentation are needed to reflect this change.

To verify the changes, please run the following script:

This script will help ensure that the NotificationsMessageActions component is properly set up to receive and use the form prop.

client/package.json (1)

62-62: Addition of Quill dependency

The Quill rich text editor (version ^2.0.2) has been added as a dependency. This is likely to replace or enhance the text editing capabilities in the application.

To ensure this change is reflected in the codebase, let's verify the usage of Quill:

client/components/open/integrations/components/NotificationsMessageActions.vue (2)

54-54: LGTM! Prop addition is correct and necessary.

The addition of the form prop is correct and necessary for the mentions binding in the template. It's properly typed as an Object and marked as required.


Line range hint 1-98: Overall, great improvements to notification message customization!

The changes in this file significantly enhance the functionality of the NotificationsMessageActions component. The addition of the MentionInput component, along with the corresponding changes in the script section, provides a more flexible and user-friendly way of customizing notification messages. Users can now include form field values in their messages, which is a valuable feature.

The code changes are consistent and well-implemented. The new form prop is correctly added and utilized, and the initialization logic in the created hook is appropriately modified to support the new functionality.

These improvements will likely lead to a better user experience when working with form notifications.

api/tests/Unit/EmailNotificationMigrationTest.php (1)

1-13: LGTM: Proper test setup and imports.

The file structure, namespace, and imports are well-organized. The use of beforeEach to instantiate the command is a good practice for maintaining a clean test environment.

api/tests/Unit/Service/Forms/MentionParserTest.php (5)

5-13: LGTM: Well-structured test for basic functionality

This test case effectively covers the basic functionality of replacing a single mention element with its corresponding value. The input and expected output are clear, and the assertion is appropriate.


15-26: LGTM: Comprehensive test for multiple mentions

This test case effectively covers the scenario of replacing multiple mention elements in a single content string. It's particularly good that it includes different data types (string and integer) for the mention values, which helps ensure proper type handling.


28-36: LGTM: Good coverage of fallback functionality

This test case effectively covers the important scenario of using a fallback value when the mention value is not found in the data array. It's good to see that the fallback value is specified in the mention element's attributes, which is a robust approach.


38-46: LGTM: Proper handling of edge case

This test case effectively covers the scenario where there's no value in the data array and no fallback specified. The expected behavior of removing the mention element entirely is correct and well-tested.


58-66: LGTM: Excellent test for HTML structure preservation

This test case effectively ensures that the parser preserves the surrounding HTML structure while replacing mentions. The use of multiple paragraphs and a div wrapper is a good representation of real-world scenarios, making this a valuable test.

client/composables/lib/vForm/Form.js (1)

92-92: Improved deep cloning implementation

The change from JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(this.originalData[key])) to cloneDeep(this.originalData[key]) is a good improvement. This modification enhances the reset method's ability to handle complex data structures more reliably.

Reasons why this change is beneficial:

  1. It can handle circular references, which JSON.parse(JSON.stringify()) cannot.
  2. It preserves non-JSON-serializable types like Date objects, functions, and undefined values.
  3. It's generally more performant for deep cloning operations.

To ensure that cloneDeep is being used consistently throughout the codebase, let's run the following check:

This script will help us identify any remaining instances of JSON.parse(JSON.stringify()) that might benefit from being replaced with cloneDeep, and also verify that cloneDeep is consistently imported and used across the codebase.

api/config/purify.php (2)

Line range hint 1-134: Overall changes look good and align with PR objectives.

The modifications to the HTMLPurifier configuration file successfully integrate mention functionality by:

  1. Introducing a custom HTML definition (OpenFormsHtmlDefinition).
  2. Allowing mention-related attributes for span elements.
  3. Consistently applying the custom definition throughout the purification process.

These changes enhance the HTML purification to accommodate mentions while maintaining security. The implementation appears solid and well-aligned with the project goals.


3-3: LGTM. Verify custom HTML definition implementation.

The change to use a custom HTML definition (OpenFormsHtmlDefinition) is appropriate for tailoring HTMLPurifier to the specific needs of the application.

Please ensure that the OpenFormsHtmlDefinition class correctly implements the required interface:

client/data/blocks_types.json (20)

8-9: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for text input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the text input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


17-18: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for date input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the date input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


26-27: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for URL input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the URL input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


35-36: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for phone number input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the phone number input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


44-45: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for email input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the email input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


53-54: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for checkbox input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the checkbox input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


62-63: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for select input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the select input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


71-72: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for multi-select input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the multi-select input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


80-81: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for matrix input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the matrix input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


89-90: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for number input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the number input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


98-99: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for rating input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the rating input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


107-108: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for scale input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the scale input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


116-117: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for slider input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the slider input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


125-126: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for file input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the file input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


134-135: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for signature input.

The is_input property is correctly set to true for the signature input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


143-144: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for non-input text block.

The is_input property is correctly set to false for the non-input text block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


152-153: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for page break block.

The is_input property is correctly set to false for the page break block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


161-162: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for divider block.

The is_input property is correctly set to false for the divider block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


170-171: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for image block.

The is_input property is correctly set to false for the image block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.


179-180: LGTM: Correct addition of is_input property for code block.

The is_input property is correctly set to false for the code block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.

api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (2)

12-12: LGTM: New import added for MentionParser

The addition of the MentionParser import is consistent with its usage in the answer method. This change enhances the functionality for parsing mentions in URLs.


Line range hint 1-150: Overall assessment: Well-implemented changes with improved functionality

The modifications to the PublicFormController enhance the handling of redirect URLs in form submissions. The introduction of MentionParser and URL validation improves both flexibility and security. The changes are backwards compatible and align well with the existing codebase structure.

Consider the minor refactoring suggestion for improved code clarity, but overall, these changes are approved and ready for merging.

client/components/global/Modal.vue (3)

7-7: Excellent use of twMerge for flexible styling!

The addition of twMerge from the tailwind-merge library is a great improvement. It allows for dynamic merging of Tailwind CSS classes, combining the static classes with any additional classes passed through $attrs.class. This change enhances the flexibility of the modal's styling without compromising its existing functionality.


97-97: LGTM: Proper import of twMerge

The import statement for twMerge from 'tailwind-merge' is correctly placed at the top of the script section. This import is necessary for the twMerge function used in the template, ensuring that the new functionality works as intended.


7-7: Summary: Excellent enhancement for flexible modal styling

The changes in this file work together to implement a new feature for flexible styling of the modal component:

  1. The use of twMerge in the template allows for dynamic merging of Tailwind CSS classes.
  2. The import of twMerge from 'tailwind-merge' in the script section supports this new functionality.

These changes enhance the component's flexibility without compromising its existing functionality. The implementation is clean, follows best practices, and should integrate well with the rest of the codebase.

Also applies to: 97-97

client/components/pages/pricing/SubscriptionModal.vue (2)

7-7: Improved modal visibility

The addition of the z-50 class ensures that the modal appears above other elements on the page, preventing potential overlap issues.


Line range hint 501-513: Seamless access to billing dashboard

The new openBillingDashboard function provides a smooth way for users to access their billing details. It properly handles the asynchronous nature of fetching the portal URL and manages loading states and error cases effectively.

client/composables/useParseMention.js (1)

20-22: Verify the presence of 'mention-field-id' attribute

Ensure that all elements with the mention attribute also have a valid mention-field-id attribute. If fieldId is undefined or not present in formattedData, it could lead to unintended behavior.

api/tests/Feature/Forms/CustomSmtpTest.php (3)

3-5: Added necessary import statements for new functionalities

The import statements for FormEmailNotification, FormSubmissionDataFactory, and AnonymousNotifiable are correctly added and are essential for the updated test cases.


44-44: Updated to use Notification facade instead of Mail

The test appropriately switches from using Mail::fake() to Notification::fake(), aligning with the transition to the Notification facade for sending emails.


53-58: ⚠️ Potential issue

Verify the mailer property in FormEmailNotification

The assertion checks that $notification->mailer === 'custom_smtp'. Please ensure that the FormEmailNotification class defines and sets the $mailer property correctly. If the mailer property is not defined or assigned within the class, this assertion may fail.

Run the following script to verify if the FormEmailNotification class sets the $mailer property:

✅ Verification successful

Mailer Property Verified Successfully

The FormEmailNotification class correctly defines and assigns the mailer property as expected.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that FormEmailNotification defines and sets the 'mailer' property.

# Find the FormEmailNotification.php file
file=$(fd FormEmailNotification.php)

if [ -n "$file" ]; then
  echo "Found file: $file"
  echo "Checking for 'public $mailer' property declaration..."
  rg 'public\s+\$mailer' "$file" || echo "Property '\$mailer' not declared."

  echo "Checking for assignment to '\$this->mailer'..."
  rg '\$this->mailer\s*=' "$file" || echo "Property '\$mailer' not assigned."
else
  echo "FormEmailNotification.php not found."
fi

Length of output: 728

client/components/forms/components/QuillyEditor.vue (2)

4-4: Possible Typo in Class Name quilly-editor

The class name quilly-editor might be a typo. If you intended to reference the Quill editor, consider renaming it to quill-editor for consistency.

If quilly-editor is intentional, please disregard this comment.


1-98: Overall Implementation Looks Solid

The component is well-structured and effectively integrates Quill with Vue's Composition API. Reactive data binding and event handling are appropriately managed, and lifecycle hooks are used correctly.

api/app/Integrations/Handlers/EmailIntegration.php (2)

30-30: Verify the logical conditions in shouldRun()

Ensure that the condition $this->integrationData->send_to && parent::shouldRun() && !$this->riskLimitReached(); correctly determines whether the integration should execute. Pay special attention to scenarios where send_to might be empty or riskLimitReached() returns unexpected results.


57-63: Ensure MentionParser correctly handles mentions in send_to

When using MentionParser to parse the send_to field for Pro users, verify that it correctly processes all mention formats and handles any edge cases, such as invalid mentions or nested mentions.

To assist, consider running tests with various send_to inputs to ensure robust parsing.

api/app/Integrations/Handlers/DiscordIntegration.php (4)

5-5: Importing MentionParser is appropriate and necessary.

The addition of use App\Open\MentionParser; correctly imports the MentionParser class, which is essential for parsing mentions in the message content.


36-37: Updating the formatter to retrieve formatted data effectively.

By modifying the formatter to use outputStringsOnly() and retrieving the fields with getFieldsWithValue(), the code ensures that the submission data is properly formatted as strings for further processing.


57-57: Iterating over $formattedData to construct the submission string is correct.

Looping through $formattedData allows for building a well-formatted submission string, which enhances the readability and presentation of submission data in the Discord message.


86-88: Utilizing MentionParser to process message content enhances functionality.

By parsing the message with MentionParser, the code dynamically incorporates mentions based on the submission data, improving the interaction within Discord messages.

api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SlackIntegration.php (3)

5-5: Import statement correctly includes MentionParser

The addition of use App\Open\MentionParser; ensures that the MentionParser class is properly imported and available for use.


36-37: Efficient use of FormSubmissionFormatter

Initializing FormSubmissionFormatter once and storing the output in $formattedData enhances performance by avoiding redundant processing in subsequent code.


59-59: Proper integration of MentionParser in message formatting

Using MentionParser to parse the message with the formatted data ensures that any mentions are correctly processed before being sent to Slack.

client/components/forms/components/MentionDropdown.vue (1)

101-109: Well-implemented insert logic in 'insertMention' function

The insertMention function efficiently checks for required values and invokes the onInsert callback correctly. It also properly updates the open state after insertion, ensuring the popover closes as expected.

api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (1)

15-15: Ensure all references to the renamed class are updated

The class has been renamed to FormEmailNotification. Please ensure that all references to FormSubmissionNotification throughout the codebase are updated to reflect this change.

Run the following script to find any remaining references to the old class name:

✅ Verification successful

All references to FormSubmissionNotification have been successfully updated.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to 'FormSubmissionNotification' in PHP files.

rg --type php 'FormSubmissionNotification'

Length of output: 42


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to 'FormSubmissionNotification' in PHP files.

rg --type php 'FormSubmissionNotification'

Length of output: 42

client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (3)

7-32: Well-implemented integration of QuillyEditor

The replacement of VueEditor with QuillyEditor is seamless. The dynamic class bindings and the use of CSS variables for font size enhance flexibility and theming. This approach improves maintainability and allows for easier customization.


41-45: Effective conditional rendering of MentionDropdown

The MentionDropdown component is appropriately conditionally rendered based on enableMentions and mentionState. This ensures that the mention functionality is only activated when needed, enhancing performance and preventing unnecessary component mounting.


148-164: Excellent addition of mention styles

The styles for mentions are well-crafted, enhancing the visual presentation of mentioned users. Utilizing Tailwind CSS's @apply directive keeps the styles consistent and maintainable. This improves the user experience by making mentions stand out appropriately.

client/components/open/forms/components/form-components/FormSubmissionSettings.vue (2)

Line range hint 121-129: Approved: Correct integration of MentionInput with mentions

The MentionInput component is properly integrated with the :mentions prop bound to form.properties, allowing users to mention properties directly within the "Redirect URL" input field.


Line range hint 133-141: Approved: Enhanced rich-text-area-input with mentions support

The rich-text-area-input component now supports mentions via the enable-mentions prop and the :mentions prop, enhancing the functionality of the "Success page text" input by allowing property mentions.

client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue (2)

143-149: LGTM!

The implementation of the TextBlock component correctly enhances the rendering of the submitted text with mentions support.


229-230: Initialization of 'submittedData'

Setting submittedData to null in the data object ensures it is properly defined before use, which is good practice.

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
<modal
:show="show"
compact-header
backdrop-blur="sm"
;backdrop-blur="true"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codebase verification

Inconsistent backdrop-blur Usage Detected

The backdrop-blur property in FirstSubmissionModal.vue has been changed from "sm" to true. Unlike other components that use specific blur sizes (e.g., backdrop-blur-sm), using a boolean value may lead to inconsistent or unintended visual effects.

  • File Affected:
    • client/components/open/forms/components/FirstSubmissionModal.vue

Please review this change to ensure it aligns with the intended design and behavior. If a specific blur size is desired, consider reverting to "sm" or another appropriate value.

🔗 Analysis chain

Verify the intended backdrop blur effect.

The backdrop-blur property has been changed from "sm" to true. This modification alters how the blur effect is applied to the modal's backdrop.

Please confirm if this change is intentional and verify that it produces the desired visual effect. If the intention was to maintain a small blur effect, you might want to revert to "sm" or adjust the CSS accordingly.

To help verify the visual impact, you can run the following command to check for any related CSS changes:

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for related CSS changes that might affect the backdrop blur

# Search for backdrop-related CSS rules
rg --type css 'backdrop|blur' client/

Length of output: 39


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for 'backdrop-blur' usage in Vue components

rg --type vue 'backdrop-blur' client/

Length of output: 65


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for 'backdrop-blur' usage in .vue files

rg 'backdrop-blur' --type-add 'vue:*.vue' --type vue client/

Length of output: 950

@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ public function rules()
're_fillable' => 'boolean',
're_fill_button_text' => 'string|min:1|max:50',
'submitted_text' => 'string|max:2000',
'redirect_url' => 'nullable|active_url|max:255',
'redirect_url' => 'nullable|max:255',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Consider adding URL format validation for 'redirect_url'

The validation rule for 'redirect_url' has been changed from 'active_url' to 'nullable|max:255'. This change allows for more flexibility by accepting nullable values and setting a maximum length, which is good. However, removing the 'active_url' validation without replacing it with a basic URL format check might lead to accepting malformed URLs.

Consider adding the 'url' validation rule to ensure basic URL format correctness:

-            'redirect_url' => 'nullable|max:255',
+            'redirect_url' => 'nullable|url|max:255',

This change will maintain the flexibility of allowing nullable values and the 255 character limit while ensuring that when a value is provided, it adheres to a valid URL format.

For a more robust solution, consider implementing a custom validation rule that checks for allowed URL schemes (e.g., http, https) and performs any application-specific URL validations without checking for active accessibility. This approach would provide better control over accepted URL formats while avoiding potential performance issues associated with the 'active_url' rule.

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
'redirect_url' => 'nullable|max:255',
'redirect_url' => 'nullable|url|max:255',

{!! $emailContent !!}

@if($form->editable_submissions)
@component('mail::button', ['url' => $form->share_url.'?submission_id='.$submission_id])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

[Security] Ensure safe construction of URLs to prevent injection attacks.

In the button component, the URL is constructed by concatenating $form->share_url and $submission_id:

['url' => $form->share_url.'?submission_id='.$submission_id]

If $form->share_url or $submission_id contain unexpected or malicious input, this could lead to security issues such as URL manipulation or injection attacks.

Consider using Laravel's route() helper or url() function to safely construct the URL, and encode parameters properly:

-@component('mail::button', ['url' => $form->share_url.'?submission_id='.$submission_id])
+@component('mail::button', ['url' => url($form->share_url, ['submission_id' => $submission_id])])

Alternatively, ensure that the parameters are properly encoded:

['url' => $form->share_url.'?submission_id='.urlencode($submission_id)]

**{{$field['name']}}**

<p style="white-space: pre-wrap">
{!! is_array($field['value'])?implode(',',$field['value']):$field['value']!!}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

[Security] Potential XSS vulnerability due to unescaped output of $field['value'].

The output of $field['value'] uses {!! !!}, which renders unescaped HTML content. If $field['value'] contains user-submitted data, this could expose the application to XSS attacks.

Escape the output using {{ }} to ensure safe rendering:

-{!! is_array($field['value'])?implode(',',$field['value']):$field['value'] !!}
+{{ is_array($field['value']) ? implode(',', $field['value']) : $field['value'] }}
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
{!! is_array($field['value'])?implode(',',$field['value']):$field['value']!!}
{{ is_array($field['value']) ? implode(',', $field['value']) : $field['value'] }}

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
@component('mail::message', ['noBranding' => $noBranding])

{!! $emailContent !!}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

[Security] Potential XSS vulnerability due to unescaped output of $emailContent.

The variable $emailContent is output using the {!! !!} syntax, which renders unescaped HTML content. If $emailContent contains any user-provided or untrusted data, this could lead to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities.

To prevent XSS attacks, consider escaping the output using {{ }}, which automatically encodes HTML entities:

-{!! $emailContent !!}
+{{ $emailContent }}
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
{!! $emailContent !!}
{{ $emailContent }}

Comment on lines +86 to +93
const mentionSpan = document.createElement('span')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', mention.field.id)
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', mention.field.name)
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', mention.fallback || '')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('contenteditable', 'false')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention', 'true')
mentionSpan.textContent = mention.field.name.length > 25 ? `${mention.field.name.slice(0, 25)}...` : mention.field.name
return mentionSpan
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Validate user input when setting attributes

When setting attributes with user-provided data in createMentionSpan, ensure that the input is properly validated or sanitized to prevent potential security issues.

Apply this diff to encode attribute values:

 const createMentionSpan = (mention) => {
   const mentionSpan = document.createElement('span')
-  mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', mention.field.id)
-  mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', mention.field.name)
-  mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', mention.fallback || '')
+  mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', encodeURIComponent(mention.field.id))
+  mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', encodeURIComponent(mention.field.name))
+  mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', encodeURIComponent(mention.fallback || ''))
   mentionSpan.setAttribute('contenteditable', 'false')
   mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention', 'true')
   mentionSpan.textContent = mention.field.name.length > 25 ? `${mention.field.name.slice(0, 25)}...` : mention.field.name
   return mentionSpan
 }

This ensures that any special characters are properly encoded.

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
const mentionSpan = document.createElement('span')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', mention.field.id)
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', mention.field.name)
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', mention.fallback || '')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('contenteditable', 'false')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention', 'true')
mentionSpan.textContent = mention.field.name.length > 25 ? `${mention.field.name.slice(0, 25)}...` : mention.field.name
return mentionSpan
const mentionSpan = document.createElement('span')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', encodeURIComponent(mention.field.id))
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', encodeURIComponent(mention.field.name))
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', encodeURIComponent(mention.fallback || ''))
mentionSpan.setAttribute('contenteditable', 'false')
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention', 'true')
mentionSpan.textContent = mention.field.name.length > 25 ? `${mention.field.name.slice(0, 25)}...` : mention.field.name
return mentionSpan

@@ -261,6 +266,7 @@ export default {
this.loading = true

form.post('/forms/' + this.form.slug + '/answer').then((data) => {
this.submittedData = form.data()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Avoid variable shadowing by renaming the 'form' parameter

The submitForm method accepts a parameter named form, which may cause confusion with the this.form instance property. To improve code clarity and prevent potential bugs due to variable shadowing, consider renaming the parameter to submissionForm or formData.

Apply this diff to rename the parameter and its usage:

 methods: {
-  submitForm (form, onFailure) {
+  submitForm (submissionForm, onFailure) {

     // ...

-    this.submittedData = form.data()
+    this.submittedData = submissionForm.data()

Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.

help="If enabled the email will contain form submission answers"
/>
<toggle-switch-input
v-if="integrationData.settings.include_submission_data"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Safely access integrationData.settings.include_submission_data in v-if directive

In the v-if directive on line 53, accessing integrationData.settings.include_submission_data without checking if integrationData.settings is defined could cause a runtime error. Ensure that integrationData.settings exists before accessing its properties.

Consider updating the v-if condition:

-      v-if="integrationData.settings.include_submission_data"
+      v-if="integrationData.settings && integrationData.settings.include_submission_data"
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
v-if="integrationData.settings.include_submission_data"
v-if="integrationData.settings && integrationData.settings.include_submission_data"

Comment on lines 77 to 79
formIntegrationId: { type: Number, required: false, default: null },
})

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Remove unused prop formIntegrationId

The prop formIntegrationId is defined but not used in the component. If it's not required, consider removing it to clean up the code.

Apply this diff:

 const props = defineProps({
   integration: { type: Object, required: true },
   form: { type: Object, required: true },
   integrationData: { type: Object, required: true },
-  formIntegrationId: { type: Number, required: false, default: null },
 })

Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.

Comment on lines +80 to +90
onBeforeMount(() => {
for (const [keyname, defaultValue] of Object.entries({
sender_name: "OpnForm",
subject: "We saved your answers",
email_content: "Hello there 👋 <br>This is a confirmation that your submission was successfully saved.",
include_submission_data: true,
include_hidden_fields_submission_data: false,
})) {
if (props.integrationData.settings[keyname] === undefined) {
props.integrationData.settings[keyname] = defaultValue
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Check for undefined integrationData.settings before accessing its properties

In the onBeforeMount hook, props.integrationData.settings[keyname] is accessed without ensuring that props.integrationData.settings is defined. This could lead to runtime errors if settings is undefined.

Apply this diff to initialize props.integrationData.settings if it's undefined:

+  if (!props.integrationData.settings) {
+    props.integrationData.settings = {}
+  }
   for (const [keyname, defaultValue] of Object.entries({
     sender_name: "OpnForm",
     subject: "We saved your answers",
     email_content: "Hello there 👋 <br>This is a confirmation that your submission was successfully saved.",
     include_submission_data: true,
     include_hidden_fields_submission_data: false,
   })) {
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
onBeforeMount(() => {
for (const [keyname, defaultValue] of Object.entries({
sender_name: "OpnForm",
subject: "We saved your answers",
email_content: "Hello there 👋 <br>This is a confirmation that your submission was successfully saved.",
include_submission_data: true,
include_hidden_fields_submission_data: false,
})) {
if (props.integrationData.settings[keyname] === undefined) {
props.integrationData.settings[keyname] = defaultValue
}
onBeforeMount(() => {
if (!props.integrationData.settings) {
props.integrationData.settings = {}
}
for (const [keyname, defaultValue] of Object.entries({
sender_name: "OpnForm",
subject: "We saved your answers",
email_content: "Hello there 👋 <br>This is a confirmation that your submission was successfully saved.",
include_submission_data: true,
include_hidden_fields_submission_data: false,
})) {
if (props.integrationData.settings[keyname] === undefined) {
props.integrationData.settings[keyname] = defaultValue
}

@JhumanJ JhumanJ mentioned this pull request Oct 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 2

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
client/components/open/integrations/components/IntegrationWrapper.vue (1)

14-25: Approved: Improved help button implementation with a suggestion.

The updated help button implementation looks good. The use of a conditional slot and the UButton component with standardized styling improves consistency.

Consider adding an aria-label to the button for better accessibility, especially since it contains an icon. For example:

 <UButton
   color="gray"
   size="sm"
   icon="i-heroicons-question-mark-circle-solid"
+  aria-label="Get help with integration"
   @click="openHelp"
 >
   Help
 </UButton>
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (3)

Line range hint 28-40: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Constructor updates

The constructor changes improve flexibility and reusability by introducing the $integrationData parameter and preparing formatted data using FormSubmissionFormatter. The conditional inclusion of hidden fields is a nice touch for customization.

Consider adding null coalescing for better null safety:

-if ($this->integrationData->include_hidden_fields_submission_data ?? false) {
+if ($this->integrationData->include_hidden_fields_submission_data ?? false) {

This change ensures that even if $this->integrationData is null, the code won't throw an error.


90-97: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Improved getReplyToEmail method

The updates to getReplyToEmail method are good improvements:

  1. Use of MentionParser allows for dynamic reply-to addresses based on form data.
  2. Email validation adds an extra layer of safety.

Consider adding null coalescing for better null safety:

-$replyTo = $this->integrationData->reply_to ?? null;
+$replyTo = $this->integrationData->reply_to ?? null;

This change ensures that even if $this->integrationData is null, the code won't throw an error.


131-135: LGTM with a suggestion: New getEmailContent method

The new getEmailContent method is a good addition:

  1. It uses MentionParser to allow for dynamic email content based on form data.
  2. It provides a default empty string if no content is specified in integrationData.

While this prevents errors, consider providing a default message instead of an empty string to avoid sending blank emails:

-$parser = new MentionParser($this->integrationData->email_content ?? '', $this->formattedData);
+$parser = new MentionParser($this->integrationData->email_content ?? 'A new form submission has been received.', $this->formattedData);

This ensures that even if no content is provided, the email will still contain a meaningful message.

api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (1)

113-130: LGTM: Well-structured getRedirectData method with a suggestion.

The new getRedirectData method effectively encapsulates the logic for handling redirect URLs, including mention parsing and URL validation. It's a good addition that improves code organization.

Consider adding a log or comment when an invalid URL is encountered:

 if ($redirectUrl && !filter_var($redirectUrl, FILTER_VALIDATE_URL)) {
+    // Log or add a comment about the invalid URL
     $redirectUrl = null;
 }

This could help with debugging if unexpected behavior occurs due to invalid URLs.

client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (1)

148-149: Avoid using !important in CSS styles

Using !important can make CSS maintenance challenging and may override other styles unintentionally. Consider increasing specificity or restructuring your CSS to achieve the desired styling without !important.

You can adjust the CSS as follows:

-.ql-mention {
-  padding-top: 0px !important;
-  margin-top: -5px !important;
+ .rich-editor .ql-editor .ql-mention {
+   padding-top: 0px;
+   margin-top: -5px;
  }
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0213f58 and d59809b.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • client/package-lock.json is excluded by !**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
  • api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (2 hunks)
  • api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (5 hunks)
  • api/config/purify.php (3 hunks)
  • client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (3 hunks)
  • client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue (3 hunks)
  • client/components/open/forms/components/FirstSubmissionModal.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/components/open/integrations/components/IntegrationWrapper.vue (1 hunks)
  • client/nuxt.config.ts (1 hunks)
  • client/package.json (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
  • api/config/purify.php
  • client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue
  • client/components/open/forms/components/FirstSubmissionModal.vue
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (3)
Learnt from: JhumanJ
PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561
File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28
Timestamp: 2024-10-09T13:56:16.694Z
Learning: The `$mailer` parameter in the `FormSubmissionNotification` constructor should be typed as `string`.
Learnt from: JhumanJ
PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561
File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28
Timestamp: 2024-09-05T18:47:04.319Z
Learning: The `$mailer` parameter in the `FormSubmissionNotification` constructor should be typed as `string`.
Learnt from: JhumanJ
PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561
File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28
Timestamp: 2024-10-09T13:56:17.547Z
Learning: The `$mailer` parameter in the `FormSubmissionNotification` constructor should be typed as `string`.
🔇 Additional comments (11)
client/nuxt.config.ts (2)

15-15: Verify the removal of the sitemap module

The @nuxtjs/sitemap module has been commented out. This could potentially impact the SEO of your application as sitemaps are crucial for search engine crawling.

Please confirm if this change is intentional. If so, ensure that you have an alternative solution for generating and serving a sitemap for your application. If not, consider re-enabling this module.

To verify the impact, you can run the following script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining sitemap-related code or alternative implementations

# Test 1: Search for sitemap-related code
echo "Searching for sitemap-related code:"
rg -i 'sitemap' --type ts --type vue

# Test 2: Check if there's a custom sitemap implementation
echo "Checking for custom sitemap implementation:"
fd -e ts -e js -e vue | xargs grep -i 'function.*sitemap'

# Test 3: Verify if sitemap is generated during build process
echo "Checking build scripts for sitemap generation:"
grep -r 'sitemap' package.json

Line range hint 1-85: Verify the removal of UI icons configuration

The AI summary mentions that the UI configuration for icons (ui: { icons: ['heroicons', 'material-symbols'] }) has been removed. This change is not visible in the provided code snippet, but it could affect the availability of icons used in the UI.

Please confirm if this change is intentional. If so, ensure that you have an alternative solution for providing icons in your application. If not, consider re-adding this configuration.

To verify the impact and usage of icons, you can run the following script:

client/package.json (3)

Line range hint 1-80: Verify removal of vue3-editor dependency.

The AI summary mentions the removal of "vue3-editor": "^0.1.1", but this change is not visible in the provided code snippet. This discrepancy needs to be addressed.

Run the following script to confirm if vue3-editor has been removed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if vue3-editor is still present in package.json
if grep -q "vue3-editor" package.json; then
  echo "vue3-editor is still present in package.json"
else
  echo "vue3-editor has been removed from package.json"
fi

# Check for any remaining imports of vue3-editor in the project
rg "from 'vue3-editor'" --type vue --type js

If vue3-editor is indeed removed, ensure all related imports and usages have been updated or removed as well.


74-74: ⚠️ Potential issue

Caution: Using 'next' version for vuedraggable may introduce instability.

The change from "vuedraggable": "^4.1.0" to "vuedraggable": "next" could potentially introduce instability to your project. The "next" tag typically refers to the next major version, which may include breaking changes.

Consider the following options:

  1. Revert to a stable version: "vuedraggable": "^4.1.0"
  2. Use a specific version number of the next major release if available
  3. If "next" is necessary, ensure thorough testing and have a rollback plan

To assess the impact, run the following script to find all usages of vuedraggable in your project:

Review these files to ensure compatibility with the "next" version.


63-63: Addition of Quill editor: Verify integration and migration plan.

The addition of Quill ("quill": "^2.0.2") as a dependency aligns with the introduction of the QuillyEditor component mentioned in the AI summary. This is a positive change as Quill is a powerful and flexible rich text editor.

To ensure a smooth transition, please verify the following:

  1. Confirm that all instances of the previous editor (vue3-editor) have been replaced with Quill.
  2. Ensure that any custom functionality from the previous editor has been migrated to Quill.
  3. Update relevant documentation to reflect this change.

Run the following script to check for any remaining references to vue3-editor:

✅ Verification successful

No remaining references to vue3-editor found.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining references to vue3-editor
rg "vue3-editor" --type vue --type js

Length of output: 65


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining references to vue3-editor within .vue and .js files
rg "vue3-editor" --glob "*.vue" --glob "*.js"

Length of output: 45

api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (4)

6-6: LGTM: Class name change and new import

The class name change from FormSubmissionNotification to FormEmailNotification better reflects its specific purpose. The addition of the MentionParser import suggests improved functionality for handling mentions in email content.

Also applies to: 15-15


20-21: LGTM: Property updates

The $mailer property is now correctly typed as string and made public, addressing a previous learning. The new private $formattedData property suggests an improved approach to handling formatted submission data.


65-73: LGTM: Improved toMail method

The toMail method has been enhanced with several improvements:

  1. Utilization of pre-formatted data ($this->formattedData) for better efficiency.
  2. Introduction of getSubject() and getEmailContent() methods for improved handling of email subject and content.
  3. Additional parameters passed to the markdown view, providing more context.

These changes should result in more flexible and maintainable email notifications.


103-107: LGTM: New getSubject method

The new getSubject method is a good addition:

  1. It uses MentionParser to allow for dynamic subjects based on form data.
  2. It provides a default subject ("New form submission") if none is specified in integrationData.

This approach ensures flexibility in subject line creation while maintaining a fallback option.

api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (2)

12-12: LGTM: New import for MentionParser.

The import for MentionParser is correctly placed and aligns with the new functionality introduced in this file.


109-111: LGTM: Improved response structure in answer method.

The changes enhance the response by including is_first_submission and utilizing the new getRedirectData method for handling redirect information. This improves code organization and provides more comprehensive data to the client.

Comment on lines 82 to 85

$originalFromAddress = Str::of(config('mail.from.address'))->explode('@');

return $originalFromAddress->first() . '+' . time() . '@' . $originalFromAddress->last();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Reconsider dynamic 'from' email address generation

While the self-hosted check is a good addition, generating a dynamic 'from' email address using time() may lead to email delivery issues or be flagged as spam by email providers. It's recommended to use a consistent 'from' email address.

Consider revising the method to use a fixed email address or an allowed variation:

 private function getFromEmail()
 {
     if (config('app.self_hosted')) {
         return config('mail.from.address');
     }

-    $originalFromAddress = Str::of(config('mail.from.address'))->explode('@');
-    return $originalFromAddress->first() . '+' . time() . '@' . $originalFromAddress->last();
+    return config('mail.from.address');
 }
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
$originalFromAddress = Str::of(config('mail.from.address'))->explode('@');
return $originalFromAddress->first() . '+' . time() . '@' . $originalFromAddress->last();
if (config('app.self_hosted')) {
return config('mail.from.address');
}
return config('mail.from.address');

Comment on lines +75 to +79
// Move the mention extension registration to onMounted

Quill.imports['formats/link'].PROTOCOL_WHITELIST.push('notion')

export default {
name: 'RichTextAreaInput',
components: { InputWrapper, VueEditor },
if (props.enableMentions && !Quill.imports['blots/mention']) {
mentionState.value = registerMentionExtension(Quill)
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Move the mention extension registration into an onMounted hook

The comment on line 75 suggests moving the mention extension registration into onMounted, but the code is still outside any lifecycle hook. This may cause the extension to register before the component is fully mounted, leading to potential issues. To ensure proper initialization, wrap the registration code inside the onMounted lifecycle hook.

Apply the following changes:

+import { onMounted } from 'vue'
...
-on Mounted
-if (props.enableMentions && !Quill.imports['blots/mention']) {
-  mentionState.value = registerMentionExtension(Quill)
-}
+onMounted(() => {
+  if (props.enableMentions && !Quill.imports['blots/mention']) {
+    mentionState.value = registerMentionExtension(Quill)
+    mentionState.value.Quill = Quill // if needed, assign Quill back to mentionState
+  }
+})

Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 7

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (2)

80-91: Consider a more descriptive method name

The getFromEmail method effectively handles different scenarios for self-hosted and non-self-hosted environments, and uses validateEmail to ensure email validity. However, consider renaming it to getSenderEmail to more accurately reflect its purpose of determining the sender's email address.


164-187: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Effective email handling and validation

The getRespondentEmail and validateEmail methods are well-implemented. The thorough search for a valid email in getRespondentEmail is commendable.

Consider adding a case-insensitive check for email fields:

- if (in_array(strtolower($field), $emailFields) && $this->validateEmail($value)) {
+ if (in_array(strtolower($field), array_map('strtolower', $emailFields)) && $this->validateEmail($value)) {

This ensures that field names like "E-Mail" or "Email" are also matched.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between d59809b and b1273dd.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)
  • api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php (1 hunks)
  • api/app/Integrations/Handlers/EmailIntegration.php (2 hunks)
  • api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (1 hunks)
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/email-notification.blade.php (1 hunks)
  • api/tests/Feature/Forms/EmailNotificationTest.php (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • api/app/Console/Commands/EmailNotificationMigration.php
  • api/resources/views/mail/form/email-notification.blade.php
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (16)
api/app/Integrations/Handlers/EmailIntegration.php (6)

5-5: LGTM: New imports added correctly.

The new imports for FormEmailNotification and MentionParser are correctly added and align with the changes in the class functionality.

Also applies to: 8-8


13-13: Consider making RISKY_USERS_LIMIT configurable

Defining RISKY_USERS_LIMIT as a hard-coded constant may limit flexibility. Consider retrieving this value from a configuration file or environment variable to allow for easier adjustments without code changes.


31-32: LGTM: Improved shouldRun method

The updated shouldRun method now correctly checks for the presence of send_to in the integration data and includes a risk limit check. These changes enhance the validation of whether the integration should run.


35-49: Improve the log message for clarity and professionalism

The riskLimitReached method effectively implements the risk limit check. However, the current log message uses multiple exclamation marks and the word "DANGEROUS," which may be less professional. Consider rephrasing the message to maintain a professional tone while clearly conveying the issue.


58-78: Add error handling when sending notifications

The handle method has been improved with new logic for parsing recipients and using the new FormEmailNotification. However, exceptions may occur when sending notifications (e.g., mail server issues). To enhance resilience, consider adding try-catch blocks to handle potential exceptions and log errors accordingly.


Line range hint 1-82: LGTM: Comprehensive update to support new email integration system

The EmailIntegration class has been significantly improved to support the new email integration system. The changes include new features like mention parsing for pro forms and align well with updates in related files. The code is now more flexible and feature-rich.

Given the extent of the changes, ensure thorough testing is conducted, particularly for:

  1. Pro vs. non-pro form behavior
  2. Risky workspace limitations
  3. Various recipient formats in the send_to field
  4. Integration with the new FormEmailNotification class
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (8)

16-34: LGTM: Well-structured class and constructor

The class is properly set up as a queueable notification with appropriate use of inheritance and interfaces. The constructor correctly initializes the properties, and the use of a private property for integrationData is good for encapsulation.


42-45: LGTM: Correct implementation of via method

The via method correctly specifies that this notification should be sent through the mail channel.


53-64: LGTM: Well-implemented toMail method

The toMail method is well-structured, using appropriate MailMessage methods and leveraging private methods for specific data retrieval. The use of a closure to add custom headers is a good practice.


66-78: LGTM: Effective submission data formatting

The formatSubmissionData method efficiently uses FormSubmissionFormatter with method chaining for clean and readable code. The conditional logic for including hidden fields based on integrationData is appropriate.


98-116: LGTM: Well-implemented reply-to email handling

The getReplyToEmail and parseReplyTo methods are well-structured and handle their responsibilities clearly. The logic for determining the reply-to email is comprehensive, and the use of MentionParser for parsing mentions is appropriate.


118-123: LGTM: Effective subject line generation

The getSubject method effectively uses MentionParser to parse the subject, consistent with other parts of the class. Providing a default subject is a good practice, and the method is concise in handling its responsibility.


125-138: LGTM: Well-implemented custom header addition

The addCustomHeaders method effectively adds custom headers to the email message. The generation of a unique Message-ID using form and submission IDs is a good practice for email threading. Removing the existing Message-ID before adding a new one prevents duplication.


140-156: LGTM: Effective mail data and content preparation

The getMailData and getEmailContent methods are concise and handle their responsibilities well. The getMailData method includes all necessary information for the email template, and the use of MentionParser in getEmailContent is consistent with other parts of the class.

api/tests/Feature/Forms/EmailNotificationTest.php (2)

1-165: Overall test coverage is comprehensive and aligns with objectives

The test cases cover various scenarios for email notifications, including sending emails with submitted data, conditional email sending, custom sender emails in different hosting modes, and more. The tests are well-structured and align with the objectives outlined in the pull request.


68-68: Verify access to the 'routes' property in the notification assertions

Accessing $notifiable->routes['mail'] may not be reliable since the routes property could be protected or may change in future framework updates. Ensure this approach is valid, or consider using available methods to access the routing information.

To confirm, run the following script to check if the routes property is accessible and public:

If the routes property is not publicly accessible, consider using the routes method or another appropriate accessor.

Also applies to: 97-97

Comment on lines +18 to +25
'send_to' => 'required',
'sender_name' => 'required',
'sender_email' => 'email|nullable',
'subject' => 'required',
'email_content' => 'required',
'include_submission_data' => 'boolean',
'include_hidden_fields_submission_data' => ['nullable', 'boolean'],
'reply_to' => 'nullable',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Consider enhancing validation for the 'send_to' field

The validation rules have been updated comprehensively. However, the 'send_to' field might benefit from additional validation to ensure it contains valid email addresses or mentions. Consider implementing a custom validation rule to check for the expected format.

expect(trim($renderedMail->render()))->toContain('Test body');
});

it('sends a email if needed', function () {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Correct grammatical error in test descriptions

In the test descriptions on lines 32 and 73, "a email" should be corrected to "an email" for proper grammar.

Apply this diff to fix the grammatical errors:

-it('sends a email if needed', function () {
+it('sends an email if needed', function () {
-it('does not send a email if not needed', function () {
+it('does not send an email if not needed', function () {

Also applies to: 73-73

Comment on lines +8 to +10
$user = $this->actingAsUser();
$workspace = $this->createUserWorkspace($user);
$form = $this->createForm($user, $workspace);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Refactor duplicated test setup code into a helper method

The code for setting up the user, workspace, and form is duplicated across multiple tests. Consider extracting this setup into a helper method to improve maintainability and reduce redundancy.

Example refactoring:

private function setUpUserWorkspaceAndForm($userMethod = 'actingAsUser')
{
    $user = $this->{$userMethod}();
    $workspace = $this->createUserWorkspace($user);
    $form = $this->createForm($user, $workspace);

    return [$user, $workspace, $form];
}

Then, in your tests, replace the setup code:

list($user, $workspace, $form) = $this->setUpUserWorkspaceAndForm();

For tests requiring a pro user:

list($user, $workspace, $form) = $this->setUpUserWorkspaceAndForm('actingAsProUser');

Also applies to: 33-35, 74-76

});

$this->createFormIntegration('email', $form->id, [
'send_to' => '<span mention-field-id="' . $emailProperty['id'] . '" mention-field-name="' . $emailProperty['name'] . '" mention-fallback="" contenteditable="false" mention="true">' . $emailProperty['name'] . '</span>',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Improve readability of the 'send_to' field construction

The 'send_to' field is constructed using a complex concatenation of strings with embedded HTML and variable interpolation, which affects readability. Consider using a helper function or HEREDOC syntax to simplify the construction.

Example using HEREDOC syntax:

$mentionSpan = <<<HTML
<span mention-field-id="{$emailProperty['id']}" mention-field-name="{$emailProperty['name']}" mention-fallback="" contenteditable="false" mention="true">{$emailProperty['name']}</span>
HTML;

$integrationData = $this->createFormIntegration('email', $form->id, [
    'send_to' => $mentionSpan,
    // ... other fields
]);

Comment on lines +102 to +132
it('uses custom sender email in self-hosted mode', function () {
config(['app.self_hosted' => true]);

$user = $this->actingAsUser();
$workspace = $this->createUserWorkspace($user);
$form = $this->createForm($user, $workspace);
$customSenderEmail = '[email protected]';
$integrationData = $this->createFormIntegration('email', $form->id, [
'send_to' => '[email protected]',
'sender_name' => 'Custom Sender',
'sender_email' => $customSenderEmail,
'subject' => 'Custom Subject',
'email_content' => 'Custom content',
'include_submission_data' => true,
'include_hidden_fields_submission_data' => false,
'reply_to' => '[email protected]',
]);

$formData = FormSubmissionDataFactory::generateSubmissionData($form);

$event = new \App\Events\Forms\FormSubmitted($form, $formData);
$mailable = new FormEmailNotification($event, $integrationData, 'mail');
$notifiable = new AnonymousNotifiable();
$notifiable->route('mail', '[email protected]');
$renderedMail = $mailable->toMail($notifiable);

expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe($customSenderEmail);
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
expect($renderedMail->subject)->toBe('Custom Subject');
expect(trim($renderedMail->render()))->toContain('Custom content');
});
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🛠️ Refactor suggestion

Reduce duplication by parameterizing tests for custom sender email

The tests for custom sender email in self-hosted and non-self-hosted modes contain similar code structures. Consider parameterizing these tests or using data providers to eliminate duplication and enhance maintainability.

Example using PHPUnit's data provider:

public function senderEmailProvider()
{
    return [
        'Self-hosted mode' => [true, '[email protected]'],
        'Non self-hosted mode' => [false, '[email protected]'],
    ];
}

/**
 * @dataProvider senderEmailProvider
 */
it('tests custom sender email based on hosting mode', function ($selfHosted, $expectedEmail) {
    config(['app.self_hosted' => $selfHosted]);
    config(['mail.from.address' => '[email protected]']);

    // ... rest of the test code

    expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe($expectedEmail);
    // ... other assertions
});

Also applies to: 134-165

Comment on lines +161 to +162
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe('[email protected]');
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Correct access to the 'from' address and name in assertions

Similar to the previous comment, adjust the assertions to access the 'address' and 'name' keys within the 'from' array to ensure accuracy.

Apply this diff to correct the assertions:

-expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe('[email protected]');
-expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
+expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe('[email protected]');
+expect($renderedMail->from[0]['name'])->toBe('Custom Sender');
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe('[email protected]');
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe('[email protected]');
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['name'])->toBe('Custom Sender');

Comment on lines +128 to +129
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe($customSenderEmail);
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Correct access to the 'from' address and name in assertions

The 'from' property is an array of sender information arrays with 'address' and 'name' keys. Accessing it using indices may lead to incorrect assertions. Update the assertions to use the appropriate keys.

Apply this diff to correct the assertions:

-expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe($customSenderEmail);
-expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
+expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe($customSenderEmail);
+expect($renderedMail->from[0]['name'])->toBe('Custom Sender');
📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe($customSenderEmail);
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe($customSenderEmail);
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['name'])->toBe('Custom Sender');

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 2

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
client/lib/utils.js (2)

91-91: Approve with a minor suggestion for improvement.

The addition of the null check improves the function's robustness by preventing potential runtime errors when url is null or undefined. This is a good defensive programming practice.

However, to improve clarity and separation of concerns, consider splitting the null check and the "localhost" check:

if (!url) return null; // or a default value
if (url.includes("localhost")) return "localhost";

This separation makes the function's behavior more explicit and easier to understand and maintain.


Line range hint 89-97: Overall, good improvement to error handling.

The change to the getDomain function improves its robustness by handling null/undefined inputs. This is a positive step towards more defensive programming.

For future improvements, consider:

  1. Separating the null check and "localhost" check for better clarity.
  2. Adding input validation or sanitization for the URL parameter.
  3. Considering the use of a URL validation library for more comprehensive URL handling.
  4. Adding unit tests to cover various edge cases, including null/undefined inputs and different URL formats.

These suggestions could further enhance the reliability and maintainability of this utility function.

client/components/open/integrations/EmailIntegration.vue (1)

38-38: Clarify the help text for 'Sender Email' field

The help text "If supported by email provider - default otherwise" might be unclear to users. Consider rephrasing it for better clarity.

Suggested revision:

-            help="If supported by email provider - default otherwise"
+            help="Specify the sender email if supported by your email provider; otherwise, the default sender email will be used."
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b1273dd and 38d3476.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • client/components/open/integrations/EmailIntegration.vue (2 hunks)
  • client/lib/utils.js (1 hunks)
  • client/nuxt.config.ts (0 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
  • client/nuxt.config.ts
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (7)
client/components/open/integrations/EmailIntegration.vue (7)

17-25: 'Send To' field is correctly configured

The MentionInput for the "Send To" field is properly set up with all required properties and mentions.


42-47: 'Subject' field configuration looks good

The MentionInput for the "Subject" field is correctly implemented with necessary properties and validations.


49-55: 'Email Content' rich text area is properly set up

The rich-text-area-input for "Email Content" is correctly configured with mentions enabled.


56-62: 'Include submission data' toggle is properly implemented

The toggle switch for "Include submission data" is correctly bound and functions as expected.


64-64: Safely access integrationData.settings.include_submission_data

This issue has been previously raised and still applies: ensure that integrationData.settings exists before accessing its properties in the v-if directive to prevent runtime errors.


71-76: 'Reply To' field is correctly configured

The MentionInput for the "Reply To" field is properly set up with the appropriate help text.


93-103: Ensure integrationData.settings is initialized

This issue has been previously raised and still applies: you should ensure that props.integrationData.settings is defined before accessing its properties to prevent runtime errors.

if (emailFields.length === 1) return emailFields[0]
return null
})
const selfHosted = computed(() => useFeatureFlag('self_hosted'))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Import computed and useFeatureFlag functions

The functions computed and useFeatureFlag are used but not imported in the script. Ensure they are imported to avoid runtime errors.

Apply this diff to add the necessary imports:

+import { computed, onBeforeMount } from 'vue'
+import { useFeatureFlag } from '@/composables/featureFlags'

Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.

replayToEmailField.value.name +
'".'
)
onBeforeMount(() => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Import onBeforeMount lifecycle hook

The onBeforeMount hook is used but not imported. Make sure to import it from Vue to prevent runtime errors.

Apply this diff to import onBeforeMount:

+import { onBeforeMount } from 'vue'

Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.

@JhumanJ JhumanJ merged commit dad5c82 into main Oct 22, 2024
5 checks passed
@JhumanJ JhumanJ deleted the 110a6-mentions-everywhere branch October 22, 2024 08:34
@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2024
@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2024
@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Nov 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants