-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 305
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
Conversation
WalkthroughThe 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modifications to existing classes and components related to email and submission integrations, and the removal of outdated files.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 Changes
Possibly related PRs
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this 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 thenotifications-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 theMentionInput
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 themessage
property is initialized with a default value of 'New form submission'. This aligns well with the newMentionInput
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:
- Verify that the email property is successfully retrieved:
expect($emailProperty)->not->toBeNull();
- Check that the integration status remains unchanged:
->status->toBe(FormIntegration::STATUS_ACTIVE)
- 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:
Edge case tests, such as:
- Updating an integration with missing or invalid data
- Handling of special characters in email addresses or content
Error scenario tests, for example:
- Attempting to update a non-existent integration
- Handling of database connection errors
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 valuesThis 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 handlingThis 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 tagsThis 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 improvementThis 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:
- Test with an empty array value for a mention.
- Test with different UTF-8 character sets (e.g., Arabic, Cyrillic, Emoji).
- Test to ensure that all attributes of the mention span are removed in the output.
- Test with nested mentions (if supported by the parser).
- 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:
- Add assertions to verify the content of the sent email, including subject, body, and other relevant fields.
- Test error handling scenarios, such as when the mention field is not found in the form data.
- 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:
- Add a comment or rename the test to clarify why an email is not needed in this scenario (e.g., no email integration configured).
- 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.
- 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:
Organize imports: Group and sort the use statements at the top of the file for better readability.
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.
Extract common setup code: Move repeated setup code (e.g., creating users, workspaces, and forms) into setup methods or helper functions to reduce duplication.
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 forspan
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 theis_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 validationThe 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, $formattedData);This refactoring would make the
answer
method more concise and easier to understand.Also applies to: 117-119
client/components/pages/pricing/SubscriptionModal.vue (2)
Line range hint
332-516
: Enhanced subscription flow and user experienceThe changes in the script setup section significantly improve the subscription process. The new logic handles different scenarios (new subscriptions and upgrades) more effectively, provides better error handling, and integrates with various analytics services.
One suggestion for improvement:
Consider extracting the analytics event logging into a separate function to improve code readability and maintainability. For example:
+const logSubscriptionEvent = (eventData) => { + try { + useAmplitude().logEvent('subscribed', eventData) + useCrisp().pushEvent('subscribed', eventData) + useGtm().trackEvent({ event: 'subscribed', ...eventData }) + if (import.meta.client && window.rewardful) { + window.rewardful('convert', { email: user.value.email }) + } + console.log('Subscription registered 🎊') + } catch (error) { + console.error('Failed to register subscription event 😔', error) + } +} // Replace the existing try-catch block with: +logSubscriptionEvent(eventData)
Line range hint
468-499
: Improved flexibility in trial handling and checkout processThe
saveDetails
function now supports custom trial durations and includes currency information in the checkout process. This enhances the flexibility of the subscription system and improves tracking of extended trials.Suggestion for improvement:
Consider adding more specific error handling for different types of errors that might occur during the checkout process. For example:
opnFetch( `/subscription/new/${ 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' functionConsider adding unit tests for the
useParseMention
function to cover various scenarios:
mentionsAllowed
beingtrue
andfalse
.- Elements with and without
mention
,mention-field-id
, andmention-fallback
attributes.- Cases where
value
is an array, a single value, orundefined
.- 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 AccessinginnerHTML
DirectlyAccessing
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 UnmountWhile you are removing event listeners and setting
quillInstance
tonull
, 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 comprehensivelyCurrently, email addresses are validated using
filter_var
withFILTER_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 methodreplaceMentions()
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 clarityIn 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 ingetRespondentEmail
The return statement can be simplified since
first()
will returnnull
if the collection is empty.Apply this diff for brevity:
- return $emailFields->count() > 0 ? $emailFields->first() : null; + return $emailFields->first();client/components/forms/components/MentionDropdown.vue (2)
15-19
: Add an accessible label to the 'Fallback value' inputThe input field for the fallback value lacks an associated label, which can cause accessibility issues for users relying on screen readers. To improve accessibility, please add a visually hidden label associated with the input.
Apply this change to include an accessible label:
+ <label for="fallbackValueInput" class="sr-only">Fallback value</label> <input + id="fallbackValueInput" v-model="fallbackValue" class="p-1 mb-2 text-sm w-1/2 border rounded-md hover:bg-gray-50" placeholder="Fallback value" >This uses the
sr-only
class to make the label available to screen readers without affecting the visual layout.
5-5
: Review the usage of the 'h-0' class on the UPopover componentThe
h-0
class sets the height to zero, which might not be necessary and could potentially cause layout issues or unintended side effects. Please verify if this class is required, and remove it if it serves no purpose.api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (1)
139-139
: Simplify email validation castingThe casting to
(bool)
in thevalidateEmail
method is redundant sincefilter_var
withFILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL
already returns a boolean.Consider simplifying the return statement:
public static function validateEmail($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 componentUsing
:key="id + placeholder"
may result in non-unique or unpredictable keys, especially ifid
orplaceholder
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
andupgradeToProMessage
are defined in your localization files.client/components/open/integrations/EmailIntegration.vue (2)
50-50
: Add comma for clarity in help textConsider 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 textConsider 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
📒 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 neededThe props are well-structured with appropriate types and default values. However, could you please clarify the distinction between
form
andformData
props? It's not immediately clear how these two props differ in their usage within the component.To better understand the usage of
form
andformData
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 memoizationThe
processedContent
computed property looks good, but there are a couple of suggestions:
- Please add a comment or documentation for the
useParseMention
function, explaining its purpose and parameters.- Consider using
useMemo
instead ofcomputed
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 issueCaution: 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 thatprocessedContent
is thoroughly sanitized before rendering.Consider the following improvements:
- Implement content sanitization in the
useParseMention
function or before assigning toprocessedContent
.- If possible, use Vue's template syntax instead of
v-html
for safer rendering.- 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 theDefinition
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:
The use of the
contenteditable
attribute onspan
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.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 componentThe addition of the
:form="form"
prop to thenotifications-message-actions
component looks good. This change allows the component to access theform
data, which is consistent with other parts of the template where theform
prop is used.However, to ensure this change doesn't introduce any unintended side effects:
- Verify that the
NotificationsMessageActions
component is expecting and can handle this newform
prop.- 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 theform
prop.client/package.json (1)
62-62
: Addition of Quill dependencyThe 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 thementions
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 theMentionInput
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 thecreated
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 functionalityThis 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 mentionsThis 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 functionalityThis 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 caseThis 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 preservationThis 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 implementationThe change from
JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(this.originalData[key]))
tocloneDeep(this.originalData[key])
is a good improvement. This modification enhances thereset
method's ability to handle complex data structures more reliably.Reasons why this change is beneficial:
- It can handle circular references, which
JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())
cannot.- It preserves non-JSON-serializable types like
Date
objects, functions, andundefined
values.- 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 withcloneDeep
, and also verify thatcloneDeep
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:
- Introducing a custom HTML definition (
OpenFormsHtmlDefinition
).- Allowing mention-related attributes for
span
elements.- 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 ofis_input
property for text input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the text input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
17-18
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for date input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the date input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
26-27
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for URL input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the URL input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
35-36
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for phone number input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the phone number input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
44-45
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for email input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the email input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
53-54
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for checkbox input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the checkbox input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
62-63
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for select input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the select input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
71-72
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for multi-select input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the multi-select input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
80-81
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for matrix input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the matrix input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
89-90
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for number input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the number input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
98-99
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for rating input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the rating input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
107-108
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for scale input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the scale input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
116-117
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for slider input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the slider input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
125-126
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for file input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the file input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
134-135
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for signature input.The
is_input
property is correctly set totrue
for the signature input block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
143-144
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for non-input text block.The
is_input
property is correctly set tofalse
for the non-input text block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
152-153
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for page break block.The
is_input
property is correctly set tofalse
for the page break block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
161-162
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for divider block.The
is_input
property is correctly set tofalse
for the divider block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
170-171
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for image block.The
is_input
property is correctly set tofalse
for the image block type. This change is consistent with the purpose of this block type.
179-180
: LGTM: Correct addition ofis_input
property for code block.The
is_input
property is correctly set tofalse
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 MentionParserThe addition of the
MentionParser
import is consistent with its usage in theanswer
method. This change enhances the functionality for parsing mentions in URLs.
Line range hint
1-150
: Overall assessment: Well-implemented changes with improved functionalityThe modifications to the
PublicFormController
enhance the handling of redirect URLs in form submissions. The introduction ofMentionParser
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 oftwMerge
for flexible styling!The addition of
twMerge
from thetailwind-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 oftwMerge
The import statement for
twMerge
from 'tailwind-merge' is correctly placed at the top of the script section. This import is necessary for thetwMerge
function used in the template, ensuring that the new functionality works as intended.
7-7
: Summary: Excellent enhancement for flexible modal stylingThe changes in this file work together to implement a new feature for flexible styling of the modal component:
- The use of
twMerge
in the template allows for dynamic merging of Tailwind CSS classes.- 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 visibilityThe 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 dashboardThe 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' attributeEnsure that all elements with the
mention
attribute also have a validmention-field-id
attribute. IffieldId
isundefined
or not present informattedData
, it could lead to unintended behavior.api/tests/Feature/Forms/CustomSmtpTest.php (3)
3-5
: Added necessary import statements for new functionalitiesThe import statements for
FormEmailNotification
,FormSubmissionDataFactory
, andAnonymousNotifiable
are correctly added and are essential for the updated test cases.
44-44
: Updated to useNotification
facade instead ofThe test appropriately switches from using
Mail::fake()
toNotification::fake()
, aligning with the transition to theNotification
facade for sending emails.
53-58
:⚠️ Potential issueVerify the
mailer
property inFormEmailNotification
The assertion checks that
$notification->mailer === 'custom_smtp'
. Please ensure that theFormEmailNotification
class defines and sets the$mailer
property correctly. If themailer
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$mailer
property:✅ Verification successful
Mailer Property Verified Successfully
The
FormEmailNotification
class correctly defines and assigns themailer
property as expected.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that FormEmailNotification defines and sets the 'mailer' property. # Find the FormEmailNotification.php file file=$(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." fiLength of output: 728
client/components/forms/components/QuillyEditor.vue (2)
4-4
: Possible Typo in Class Namequilly-editor
The class name
quilly-editor
might be a typo. If you intended to reference the Quill editor, consider renaming it toquill-editor
for consistency.If
quilly-editor
is intentional, please disregard this comment.
1-98
: Overall Implementation Looks SolidThe 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 inshouldRun()
Ensure that the condition
$this->integrationData->send_to && parent::shouldRun() && !$this->riskLimitReached();
correctly determines whether the integration should execute. Pay special attention to scenarios wheresend_to
might be empty orriskLimitReached()
returns unexpected results.
57-63
: EnsureMentionParser
correctly handles mentions insend_to
When using
MentionParser
to parse thesend_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
: ImportingMentionParser
is appropriate and necessary.The addition of
use App\Open\MentionParser;
correctly imports theMentionParser
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 withgetFieldsWithValue()
, 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
$formattedData
allows for building a well-formatted submission string, which enhances the readability and presentation of submission data in the Discord message.
86-88
: UtilizingMentionParser
to process message content enhances functionality.By parsing the message with
MentionParser
, the code dynamically incorporates mentions based on the submission data, improving the interaction within Discord messages.api/app/Integrations/Handlers/SlackIntegration.php (3)
5-5
: Import statement correctly includesMentionParser
The addition of
use App\Open\MentionParser;
ensures that theMentionParser
class is properly imported and available for use.
36-37
: Efficient use ofFormSubmissionFormatter
Initializing
FormSubmissionFormatter
once and storing the output in$formattedData
enhances performance by avoiding redundant processing in subsequent code.
59-59
: Proper integration ofMentionParser
in message formattingUsing
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' functionThe
insertMention
function efficiently checks for required values and invokes theonInsert
callback correctly. It also properly updates theopen
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 updatedThe class has been renamed to
FormEmailNotification
. Please ensure that all references toFormSubmissionNotification
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 QuillyEditorThe replacement of
VueEditor
withQuillyEditor
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 MentionDropdownThe
MentionDropdown
component is appropriately conditionally rendered based onenableMentions
andmentionState
. This ensures that the mention functionality is only activated when needed, enhancing performance and preventing unnecessary component mounting.
148-164
: Excellent addition of mention stylesThe 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 ofMentionInput
with mentionsThe
MentionInput
component is properly integrated with the:mentions
prop bound toform.properties
, allowing users to mention properties directly within the "Redirect URL" input field.
Line range hint
133-141
: Approved: Enhancedrich-text-area-input
with mentions supportThe
rich-text-area-input
component now supports mentions via theenable-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
tonull
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" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
'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]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[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']!!} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[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']) : $field['value'] }}
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
{!! is_array($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 !!} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[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.
{!! $emailContent !!} | |
{{ $emailContent }} |
const mentionSpan = document.createElement('span') | ||
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', mention.field.id) | ||
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', mention.field.name) | ||
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', mention.fallback || '') | ||
mentionSpan.setAttribute('contenteditable', 'false') | ||
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention', 'true') | ||
mentionSpan.textContent = mention.field.name.length > 25 ? `${mention.field.name.slice(0, 25)}...` : mention.field.name | ||
return mentionSpan |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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 ? `${mention.field.name.slice(0, 25)}...` : mention.field.name
return mentionSpan
}
This ensures that any special characters are properly encoded.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
const mentionSpan = document.createElement('span') | |
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-id', mention.field.id) | |
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-field-name', mention.field.name) | |
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention-fallback', mention.fallback || '') | |
mentionSpan.setAttribute('contenteditable', 'false') | |
mentionSpan.setAttribute('mention', 'true') | |
mentionSpan.textContent = mention.field.name.length > 25 ? `${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() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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.
v-if="integrationData.settings.include_submission_data" | |
v-if="integrationData.settings && integrationData.settings.include_submission_data" |
formIntegrationId: { type: Number, required: false, default: null }, | ||
}) | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
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 | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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.
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 | |
} |
There was a problem hiding this 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 updatesThe constructor changes improve flexibility and reusability by introducing the
$integrationData
parameter and preparing formatted data usingFormSubmissionFormatter
. The conditional inclusion of hidden fields is a nice touch for customization.Consider adding null coalescing for better null safety:
-if ($this->integrationData->include_hidden_fields_submission_data ?? false) { +if ($this->integrationData->include_hidden_fields_submission_data ?? false) {This change ensures that even if
$this->integrationData
is null, the code won't throw an error.
90-97
: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Improved getReplyToEmail methodThe updates to
getReplyToEmail
method are good improvements:
- Use of
MentionParser
allows for dynamic reply-to addresses based on form data.- Email validation adds an extra layer of safety.
Consider adding null coalescing for better null safety:
-$replyTo = $this->integrationData->reply_to ?? null; +$replyTo = $this->integrationData->reply_to ?? null;This change ensures that even if
$this->integrationData
is null, the code won't throw an error.
131-135
: LGTM with a suggestion: New getEmailContent methodThe new
getEmailContent
method is a good addition:
- It uses
MentionParser
to allow for dynamic email content based on form data.- It provides a default empty string if no content is specified in
integrationData
.While this prevents errors, consider providing a default message instead of an empty string to avoid sending blank emails:
-$parser = new MentionParser($this->integrationData->email_content ?? '', $this->formattedData); +$parser = new MentionParser($this->integrationData->email_content ?? 'A new form submission has been received.', $this->formattedData);This ensures that even if no content is provided, the email will still contain a meaningful message.
api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (1)
113-130
: LGTM: Well-structuredgetRedirectData
method with a suggestion.The new
getRedirectData
method effectively encapsulates the logic for handling redirect URLs, including mention parsing and URL validation. It's a good addition that improves code organization.Consider adding a log or comment when an invalid URL is encountered:
if ($redirectUrl && !filter_var($redirectUrl, FILTER_VALIDATE_URL)) { + // Log or add a comment about the invalid URL $redirectUrl = null; }
This could help with debugging if unexpected behavior occurs due to invalid URLs.
client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (1)
148-149
: Avoid using!important
in CSS stylesUsing
!important
can make CSS maintenance challenging and may override other styles unintentionally. Consider increasing specificity or restructuring your CSS to achieve the desired styling without!important
.You can adjust the CSS as follows:
-.ql-mention { - padding-top: 0px !important; - margin-top: -5px !important; + .rich-editor .ql-editor .ql-mention { + padding-top: 0px; + margin-top: -5px; }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
client/package-lock.json
is excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
- api/app/Http/Controllers/Forms/PublicFormController.php (2 hunks)
- api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (5 hunks)
- api/config/purify.php (3 hunks)
- client/components/forms/RichTextAreaInput.client.vue (3 hunks)
- client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue (3 hunks)
- client/components/open/forms/components/FirstSubmissionModal.vue (1 hunks)
- client/components/open/integrations/components/IntegrationWrapper.vue (1 hunks)
- client/nuxt.config.ts (1 hunks)
- client/package.json (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- api/config/purify.php
- client/components/open/forms/OpenCompleteForm.vue
- client/components/open/forms/components/FirstSubmissionModal.vue
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (3)
Learnt from: JhumanJ PR: JhumanJ/OpnForm#561 File: api/app/Notifications/Forms/FormSubmissionNotification.php:25-28 Timestamp: 2024-10-09T13:56:16.694Z Learning: The `$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 moduleThe
@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 configurationThe 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 jsIf vue3-editor is indeed removed, ensure all related imports and usages have been updated or removed as well.
74-74
:⚠️ Potential issueCaution: 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:
- Revert to a stable version:
"vuedraggable": "^4.1.0"
- Use a specific version number of the next major release if available
- 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:
- Confirm that all instances of the previous editor (vue3-editor) have been replaced with Quill.
- Ensure that any custom functionality from the previous editor has been migrated to Quill.
- 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 jsLength 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 importThe class name change from
FormSubmissionNotification
toFormEmailNotification
better reflects its specific purpose. The addition of theMentionParser
import suggests improved functionality for handling mentions in email content.Also applies to: 15-15
20-21
: LGTM: Property updatesThe
$mailer
property is now correctly typed asstring
and made public, addressing a previous learning. The new private$formattedData
property suggests an improved approach to handling formatted submission data.
65-73
: LGTM: Improved toMail methodThe
toMail
method has been enhanced with several improvements:
- Utilization of pre-formatted data (
$this->formattedData
) for better efficiency.- Introduction of
getSubject()
andgetEmailContent()
methods for improved handling of email subject and content.- 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 methodThe new
getSubject
method is a good addition:
- It uses
MentionParser
to allow for dynamic subjects based on form data.- 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 inanswer
method.The changes enhance the response by including
is_first_submission
and utilizing the newgetRedirectData
method for handling redirect information. This improves code organization and provides more comprehensive data to the client.
|
||
$originalFromAddress = Str::of(config('mail.from.address'))->explode('@'); | ||
|
||
return $originalFromAddress->first() . '+' . time() . '@' . $originalFromAddress->last(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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.
$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'); |
// 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) | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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.
There was a problem hiding this 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 nameThe
getFromEmail
method effectively handles different scenarios for self-hosted and non-self-hosted environments, and usesvalidateEmail
to ensure email validity. However, consider renaming it togetSenderEmail
to more accurately reflect its purpose of determining the sender's email address.
164-187
: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Effective email handling and validationThe
getRespondentEmail
andvalidateEmail
methods are well-implemented. The thorough search for a valid email ingetRespondentEmail
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
📒 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
andMentionParser
are correctly added and align with the changes in the class functionality.Also applies to: 8-8
13-13
: Consider makingRISKY_USERS_LIMIT
configurableDefining
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 methodThe updated
shouldRun
method now correctly checks for the presence ofsend_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 professionalismThe
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 notificationsThe
handle
method has been improved with new logic for parsing recipients and using the newFormEmailNotification
. 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 systemThe
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:
- Pro vs. non-pro form behavior
- Risky workspace limitations
- Various recipient formats in the
send_to
field- Integration with the new
FormEmailNotification
classapi/app/Notifications/Forms/FormEmailNotification.php (8)
16-34
: LGTM: Well-structured class and constructorThe 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 methodThe
via
method correctly specifies that this notification should be sent through the mail channel.
53-64
: LGTM: Well-implemented toMail methodThe
toMail
method is well-structured, using appropriateMailMessage
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 formattingThe
formatSubmissionData
method efficiently usesFormSubmissionFormatter
with method chaining for clean and readable code. The conditional logic for including hidden fields based onintegrationData
is appropriate.
98-116
: LGTM: Well-implemented reply-to email handlingThe
getReplyToEmail
andparseReplyTo
methods are well-structured and handle their responsibilities clearly. The logic for determining the reply-to email is comprehensive, and the use ofMentionParser
for parsing mentions is appropriate.
118-123
: LGTM: Effective subject line generationThe
getSubject
method effectively usesMentionParser
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 additionThe
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 preparationThe
getMailData
andgetEmailContent
methods are concise and handle their responsibilities well. ThegetMailData
method includes all necessary information for the email template, and the use ofMentionParser
ingetEmailContent
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 objectivesThe 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 assertionsAccessing
$notifiable->routes['mail']
may not be reliable since theroutes
property could be protected or may change in future framework updates. Ensure this approach is valid, or consider using available methods to access the routing information.To confirm, run the following script to check if the
routes
property is accessible and public:If the
routes
property is not publicly accessible, consider using theroutes
method or another appropriate accessor.Also applies to: 97-97
'send_to' => 'required', | ||
'sender_name' => 'required', | ||
'sender_email' => 'email|nullable', | ||
'subject' => 'required', | ||
'email_content' => 'required', | ||
'include_submission_data' => 'boolean', | ||
'include_hidden_fields_submission_data' => ['nullable', 'boolean'], | ||
'reply_to' => 'nullable', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider enhancing validation for the 'send_to' field
The validation rules have been updated comprehensively. However, the 'send_to' field might benefit from additional validation to ensure it contains valid email addresses or mentions. Consider implementing a custom validation rule to check for the expected format.
expect(trim($renderedMail->render()))->toContain('Test body'); | ||
}); | ||
|
||
it('sends a email if needed', function () { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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
$user = $this->actingAsUser(); | ||
$workspace = $this->createUserWorkspace($user); | ||
$form = $this->createForm($user, $workspace); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Refactor duplicated test setup code into a helper method
The code for setting up the user, workspace, and form is duplicated across multiple tests. Consider extracting this setup into a helper method to improve maintainability and reduce redundancy.
Example refactoring:
private function setUpUserWorkspaceAndForm($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>', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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
]);
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($renderedMail->render()))->toContain('Custom content'); | ||
}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Reduce duplication by parameterizing tests for custom sender email
The tests for custom sender email in self-hosted and non-self-hosted modes contain similar code structures. Consider parameterizing these tests or using data providers to eliminate duplication and enhance maintainability.
Example using PHPUnit's data provider:
public function senderEmailProvider()
{
return [
'Self-hosted mode' => [true, '[email protected]'],
'Non self-hosted mode' => [false, '[email protected]'],
];
}
/**
* @dataProvider senderEmailProvider
*/
it('tests custom sender email based on hosting mode', function ($selfHosted, $expectedEmail) {
config(['app.self_hosted' => $selfHosted]);
config(['mail.from.address' => '[email protected]']);
// ... rest of the test code
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe($expectedEmail);
// ... other assertions
});
Also applies to: 134-165
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe('[email protected]'); | ||
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Correct access to the 'from' address and name in assertions
Similar to the previous comment, adjust the assertions to access the 'address' and 'name' keys within the 'from' array to ensure accuracy.
Apply this diff to correct the assertions:
-expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe('[email protected]');
-expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender');
+expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe('[email protected]');
+expect($renderedMail->from[0]['name'])->toBe('Custom Sender');
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe('[email protected]'); | |
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender'); | |
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['address'])->toBe('[email protected]'); | |
expect($renderedMail->from[0]['name'])->toBe('Custom Sender'); |
expect($renderedMail->from[0])->toBe($customSenderEmail); | ||
expect($renderedMail->from[1])->toBe('Custom Sender'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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.
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'); |
There was a problem hiding this 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:
- Separating the null check and "localhost" check for better clarity.
- Adding input validation or sanitization for the URL parameter.
- Considering the use of a URL validation library for more comprehensive URL handling.
- 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' fieldThe 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
📒 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 configuredThe
MentionInput
for the "Send To" field is properly set up with all required properties and mentions.
42-47
: 'Subject' field configuration looks goodThe
MentionInput
for the "Subject" field is correctly implemented with necessary properties and validations.
49-55
: 'Email Content' rich text area is properly set upThe
rich-text-area-input
for "Email Content" is correctly configured with mentions enabled.
56-62
: 'Include submission data' toggle is properly implementedThe toggle switch for "Include submission data" is correctly bound and functions as expected.
64-64
: Safely accessintegrationData.settings.include_submission_data
This issue has been previously raised and still applies: ensure that
integrationData.settings
exists before accessing its properties in thev-if
directive to prevent runtime errors.
71-76
: 'Reply To' field is correctly configuredThe
MentionInput
for the "Reply To" field is properly set up with the appropriate help text.
93-103
: EnsureintegrationData.settings
is initializedThis 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')) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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(() => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
MentionParser
class to enhance mention functionality across various components.MentionInput
,TextBlock
,FormSubmissionFormatter
, andQuillyEditor
to improve user input and submission formatting.FormEmailNotification
class for handling email notifications for form submissions.Bug Fixes
Improvements
RichTextAreaInput
component to support mention capabilities.Removals
SubmissionConfirmationIntegration
and related components to streamline email notifications.confirmation-submission-notification
email template and associated tests.submission-notification
email template and related confirmation email tests.