## Description
Add captcha for the invite user flow.
Fixes https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/CGBPVEJ5C/p1710134091696379https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31789
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Workspace"
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!IMPORTANT]
> Workflow run:
<https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8321963367>
> Commit: `769030f0a3deb09e256c38cba7d6d30a9a80a379`
> Cypress dashboard url: <a
href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8321963367&attempt=1"
target="_blank">Click here!</a>
> All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Integrated Google reCAPTCHA in the user invitation form to enhance
security during form submissions.
- **Enhancements**
- Improved handling of URL parameters in utility functions for more
robust data processing.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com>
## Description
Ref:
https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/C040LHZN03V/p1700206435426579
## Background
At the start of the new appsmith server, we register the instanceId with
cloud services by invoking the cloud services api. For some of the
instances, if this register api call didn't go through, the cloud
services db will not have the instanceId.
While connecting to GSheets, we do a check if the request is coming from
a valid registered instance, and if it is not present this api fails.
The appsmith mongo database config collection, keeps a record of whether
this instance was registered or not.
In some scenarios, the appsmith_registered field shows that the instance
is registered but it is not as instanceId is missing in CS, i.e. the
appsmith server has the info that the instance is registered with CS but
the CS db has not registered the instance.
> This PR triggers the re-registration flow to the cloud services if the
instance is not registered.
> When calling the google sheets API to cloud services, if the response
received is 403 FORBIDDEN, it indicates the instance is not registered,
in which scenario we retrigger the registeration flow and call the CS
again.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#28952
#### Media
> DEMO
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cVluIAQlzxwb7A2bgBBMJ0I4awSV6fKp/view?usp=sharing
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags=""
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!CAUTION]
> If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt
the CI result for your PR.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
The point is to prevent unfortunate field name problems like this:
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/31760/files.
This NodeJS script does a very rudimentary analysis on all Java files,
with a few regular expressions, and finds anomalies. As such, since it's
not very smart, it's quite strict. I intend to make it a little more
strict in the coming days, but it's a start.
It's not hooked into any processes/CI yet, but that will also come in
next. Since it's not very smart, it actually runs quite fast (.8s on
EE).
The script also doesn't exit with a non-zero exit code when it finds a
problem. Also will be solved as part of integrating it into CI.
This PR gets finer control into what fields are allowed in
request-body-only, vs what's allowed in response-body-only. This leaves
the fields to separately controlled regarding what can go into the
database and what can't.
[Slack
thread](https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/CPQNLFHTN/p1710125307810949).
Migration takes ~24s on release, and ~210s (3.5 mins) on prod.
That makes this a slightly long migration, so I'd like reviewers'
opinion on if this PR's changes are worth dealing with that migration
time.
This change is needed in the Postgres branch. Some of the fields on
this, especially the fact that the `id` field has a persistence-specific
`@Id` annotation, is throwing Hibernate off in weird ways that I didn't
spend much time diving into. Removing `BaseDomain` on `Layout`, was a
much simpler/smaller change than that, and it got Hibernate to behave
again.
These APIs are getting deprecated and are setting up for removal soon.
This PR changes such API uses to ones that aren't deprecated. This is
needed towards upgrading Spring to get rid of a few CVEs on Appsmith
image.
Removing the `BridgeQuery.or` API since
1. it reads confusing. Are the passed-in items applied with an `or`, or
the current queries applied with the parameters with an `or`. Unlike
`and` method, this difference with `or` can change the meaning of the
query drastically.
2. it doesn't translate very well into Postgres world. Multiple hoops to
manage the same API, just not worth it.
The static `Bridge.or` looks, reads, and works much better. That's the
suggested alternative for this.
## Description
> code split methods to support native triggering of workflows.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes # (issue number)
> if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers
about this first
>
>
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to not work as expected)
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
- This change requires a documentation update
>
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced the action collection view with additional parameters for
better access control and view mode handling.
- Improved action execution process by enabling the setting of
auto-generated headers dynamically, enhancing the flexibility and
customization of action executions.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
Reverts appsmithorg/appsmith#31623
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Updated method signatures and parameters related to OAuth2
authentication to simplify and enhance the redirect URL population
process.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
> Datasource Controller's getTokenRequestUrl() is currently bounded to
Pages.
> This is a code split to support generation of token request url for
other contexts like modules and workflows.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [[Bug]: Authenticated API & Authenticated graphQL API with OAuth2
throws 404 error in
workflows](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31554)
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] JUnit
Existing test cases should pass.
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Updated OAuth2 authorization process to use context-specific
parameters for enhanced flexibility and security.
- **Refactor**
- Modified `getTokenRequestUrl` and
`getAuthorizationCodeURLForGenericOAuth2` methods to accept
`contextType` and `contextId`, improving the OAuth2 flow.
- Adjusted logging and method parameters across various classes for
consistency with new OAuth2 process.
- **Tests**
- Updated test cases to reflect changes in method parameter orders and
OAuth2 authorization enhancements.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
This PR fixes all uses of double brace initialization, with ordinary
normal code.
It is usually advised to avoid Double brace initialization, especially
for building collections as it can cause very hard-to-troubleshoot bugs
with systems that use reflection a lot, like Spring, Hibernate, Jackson,
etc.
Almost every Java linter out there recommends to avoid this.
This can be configured in IntelliJ to show up as an error with the
following configuration. Please **please** do this.
## Description
Added server side create action instrumentation for following cases:
Action | Source | Frontend/Backend | Tests Added?
-- | -- | -- | --
Create Action / query from any other place in app (entity explorer /
datasource preview / ombinar) | self | source sent from frontend |
Cypress
Drag a table widget → Click connect data → Select datasource → select
table → click on connect data | one-click-binding | source sent from
frontend | Cypress
Generate CRUD triggered from new page menu or datasource preview |
generate-crud-page | source set in backend | No
When page is cloned | clone-page | source set in backend | No
When application is forked | fork-application | source set in backend |
No
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#31173
> if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers
about this first
>
>
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [x] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced event tracking capabilities by introducing an enumeration to
track the source of action creation for analytics.
- **Enhancements**
- Improved action creation flow by specifying the source in various
components, aiding in precise analytics and debugging.
- Streamlined analytics properties method across services for
consistency and simplicity.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Adjusted assertion logic in Cypress tests to validate the source of
action creation accurately, ensuring reliability in automated testing.
- **Refactor**
- Simplified method signatures and logic in server-side analytics
handling for better maintainability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”>
Managed to remove the `Criteria` and `where` imported from MongoDB APIs.
The `Bridge` API calls should work the same on Postgres as well as here.
We'll be moving more repository methods over to this API soon.
Notice that the `Update` import is still there. Bridge API for `Update`
objects is also almost ready, and is coming up soon.
## Description
When a page is added from template using the new page via template CTA,
the customjs lib used is not saved. This is because of the condition
used in Import Export flow for append to application flow.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#31372
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced import functionality to better handle Custom JavaScript
Libraries, ensuring smoother re-imports and updates.
- **Tests**
- Added new tests to verify the improved handling and integrity of
Custom JavaScript Libraries during the import process.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
> Add context based authentication instead of being bounded by page.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes # (issue number)
> if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers
about this first
>
>
#### Media
> N/A
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
#### Test Plan
> N/A
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> N/A
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced request handling for Appsmith tokens with additional
parameters for broader context.
- Streamlined integration processes with new data transfer objects.
- **Refactor**
- Consolidated integration functionalities for improved code
reusability.
- Optimized authentication process with updated method signatures.
- **Documentation**
- Updates in user and developer interactions with the API, focusing on
token requests and integrations.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ayush Pahwa <ayushpahwa96@gmail.com>
## Description
> Code split and refactor to support action execution without
permissions
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [[Task]: Permission less way of executing a workflow trigger query
securely](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30231)
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
Manually tested the execution of an Action (with and without datasource)
by a curl command on a user who is in no way associated to the
workspace.
- [x] JUnit
Existing unit tests should pass.
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Introduced a feature to optionally bypass permission checks in
specific scenarios, enhancing flexibility in operations.
- **Refactor**
- Updated method signatures across several classes to support
conditional permission checks.
- **Tests**
- Added new tests to validate the behavior of permission retrieval with
the bypass option.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
## Description
The primary aim of this feature is to empower users by enabling them to
seamlessly integrate building blocks along with their associated
components (queries, JavaScript, datasources, and widgets) into their
existing applications through drag-and-drop functionality.
This PR adds change to create a Partial IE engine to download the json
file from CS, then add all DS, JS, Queries and Custom JS Libs. Also
handle the name refactoring in js, queries and dsl and then return
modified widget dsl to frontend.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#31315
#### Media
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
#### Test Plan
https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Test-planning-Drag-and-drop-building-blocks-030b0a5e944a478c9598ad65ba5096e2?pm=c
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Added `BuildingBlockDTO` import.
- Added `ApplicationTemplateService` and `WidgetRefactorUtil` services.
- Added `importBuildingBlock` method.
- Introduced partial import functionality for building blocks.
- Added capability to refactor widget and action names during import to
avoid name clashes.
- **Enhancements**
- Improved logic for importing resources within a page.
- Enhanced name refactoring in DSL bindings to ensure consistency across
the application.
- **Refactor**
- Updated methods to handle new import structures and services more
efficiently.
- **Tests**
- Added new tests to verify partial imports and name refactoring
functionalities.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
1. This is unused.
2. Such perma-caching is better owned by the repository, whose data is
being cached. For example, `UserRepository*` in case of
`getAnonymousUser`. Having all cached resources in one place doesn't
scale. Besides, doing it this way means we have do hit the DB directly
with `mongoOperations`, because injecting any repository beans will
cause cyclic injections.
Migration the Bridge APIs to static+non-static versions for a more
fluent API, and to make it extendable to get `Bridge.or` and
`Bridge.and`.
We're also making the API generified, which isn't strictly needed here,
but is needed for the `CriteriaBuilder` API on Postgres.
1. We remove the `mongoTemplate` and replace it with `mongoOperations`,
which we get from the base impl class anyway. One less thing to port.
2. We also move the actual _publish_ logic to a separate protected
method so it can be reused in the EE repo impl class, which has this
logic duplicated.
Instead of `upsert`, we `update` first, which is arguably the most used
operation in this context, and if that fails, then we attempt an insert.
We're not expecting a performance hit, since most operations here would
be an actual `update` only.
Instead of `upsert`, we `update` first, which is arguably the most used
operation in this context, and if that fails, then we attempt an insert.
We're not expecting a performance hit, since most operations here would
be an actual `update` only.
cherry picked from commit 75d2f2a8c4,
which was accidentally pushed to `release` branch.
The current `TestResultLoggerExtension` extension only finds failed
tests from the server module, and not from any of the plugin or other
modules.
To fix this, this PR collects failed tests using the Surefire XML test
reports already generated by the `mvn test` command.
This reverts commit 5647916478.
This seems to have broken our ability to re-run failed tests on server
workflow. We'll bring the changes back after we figure out how to not
lose that capability.
## Description
> Code split for entity search.
> 1. Move the methods to SearchEntityHelper to be readily available for
re-use.
> 2. Rename SearchEntitySolutionTest -> SearchEntitySolutionCETest
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [[Task]: Add search functionality for workflows
#30843](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30843)
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> None, as this is just a refactor.
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Improved code efficiency in search functionality by centralizing the
logic for creating pageable and sort objects.
- **Tests**
- Renamed a test class to better reflect its purpose.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31280
#### Media
<img width="1471" alt="Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 11 04 33 AM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/41686026/a7b574fb-5a9e-4be5-a3f1-18afd3f4f956">
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [x] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Modified the way workspace URLs are constructed to enhance link
handling.
- **Tests**
- Added tests to ensure the reliability of workspace invite URL
generation.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
This whole flow is not affecting anything. At the end, in the repo
methods, the change is applied to a `Workspace.userRoles` field, which
doesn't even exist today. Effectively making this flow ineffectual and
unnecessary.
The `BaseService` keeps references to a `ReactiveMongoTemplate`, a
`MongoConverter` and a `Scheduler`.
For the first two, they shouldn't be directly used at all in Service
classes, that's an abstraction leak. That's what repositories are for.
The third one isn't really used anywhere in `BaseService` at all.
This PR removes all three of these from `BaseService`.
## Description
This PR adds `create_NEWACTION` instrumentation for generate crud flow.
Today generate crud flow is handled by `/crud` API, this API is
responsible for creating actions, widgets and everything that is needed
for generating crud app. When actions are created in generate crud flow,
`create_NEWACTION` event is triggered, we wanted to add details like
`isUserCreated` and `accelerator` to this event, which will help us in
segregation of actions based on whether they were created manually or by
generate crud accelerator.
In this PR, we are passing the event context of generate crud when
calling create action function, this context is then eventually added to
the event properties.
**Test cases:**
- When generate crud flow is triggered, `create_NEWACTION` event should
have two more props `isUserCreated: false` and `accelerator:
"generate-crud`
- When actions are created by any other method, these two properties
wont be there.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#31171
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Introduced a new event type `GENERATE_PAGE` for enhanced analytics and
event tracking capabilities.
- **Refactor**
- Modified analytics properties generation across various services to
include context-specific information, improving the accuracy and
relevance of analytics data collected.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”>
QueryDSL will be replaced with Lombok's `FieldNameConstants` here. Why?
1. QueryDSL with JPA on relational databases doesn't lend itself very
well to nested data structures. But with MongoDB, it works quite well.
So we've come to rely on it quite a bit. Since we intend to move towards
a more flat, relation-ed and normalized DB design once we get to
Postgres, dealing with nested data structures should be seen as
temporary.
2. We only use QueryDSL for field name constants, and absolutely nothing
else. QueryDSL is a far more capable and powerful system, and is
overkill for this purpose. Lombok's annotation is exactly tuned for this
purpose and is more concise and easy-to-use.
3. QueryDSL query generation current doesn't work in IntelliJ, but
Lombok's does. So this will free us up from having to run a Maven build
when sometimes switching branches.
**PS**: This PR doesn't remove QueryDSL entirely. Only a part of it.
That'd become a much bigger PR and I'm already uncomfortable with the
size of this PR. Once this is merged, I'll open further PRs until we
completely remove QueryDSL.
**PPS**: QueryDSL is a powerful querying mechanism that we don't use
today. Perhaps once we're comfortable with Postgres in the future, we
will very likely revisit.
## Description
Add missing fields in Appsmith AI Default datasource
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Introduced tracking for creation and update times (`createdAt` and
`updatedAt`) for Actions and Datasources to enhance data management and
auditing capabilities.
- Enhanced the default Appsmith AI Datasources with necessary fields and
default permission groups to ensure seamless operation and access
control.
- **Refactor**
- Consolidated and refined migration scripts to add missing fields and
configurations to Appsmith AI Datasources, improving their functionality
and reliability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
On signup failure, we need to redirect the client to same signup page
they were on, for the error message to show up. So instead of
redirecting to the homepage, we get the path from the incoming request
and use that.
The Bridge API is an alternative to building `Criteria` objects for
running operations on the database.
**Why do we need/want this?** The Bridge API will have the same
interface in Appsmith MongoDB, and in Appsmith Postgres. This means when
we write a function that uses the Bridge API to run a query, we enjoy
the guarantee that the function will work with both MongoDB and
Postgres.
**Why is that important?** As new features are being developed, and
changes made, the Postgres branch is having to play catch-up in porting
the queries to Postgres. But with this, that won't be necessary.
Besides, the diff between MongoDB and Postgres versions of Appsmith
would be significantly smaller with this.
**What conditions will be supported?** The Bridge API is intentionally
non-exhaustive. It is intended to replace the most commonly used
criteria definitions. For the rest, falling back to the way we used to
build Criteria is just fine. We're only changing the ladder used to get
to the ceiling. The hammers to break the ceiling to go further, is still
there.
**Can I start using it?** Yes please. I'm only adding one condition
here, but I have changes for ~4 more (`in`, `isNull`, etc.) that I'll be
pushing as PRs next up. I'm also only using it in one place in this PR.
I'll start moving more direct uses of Criteria API to the Bridge API in
future PRs.
**Why does Bridge have `.equal()` instead of `.where().is()`?** Two
reasons. One, an API like `.equal` is easier to implement, and since the
Bridge API is code that we will have to maintain, I voted for
simplicity. Two, once we move to Postgres, we'll be using the
`CriteriaBuilder` API, which uses the `.equal()` style, so might as well
get used it. 🙂
## Description
> small change to fix the issue of file uploads
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30451
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Increased the maximum in-memory size for multipart requests to 150MB,
enhancing file upload capabilities.
- Added the ability to control the max size of multipart files in
request objects.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
Support curl imports for different contexts.
### Server changes
Previous API:
`/api/v1/import?type=CURL&pageId={pageId}&name=Api2&workspaceId={workspaceId}`
New API:
With context type, it will create for the specific context.
`/api/v1/import?type=CURL&contextId={contextId}&name=Api1&workspaceId={workspaceId}&contextType={contextType}`
Without context type, it will create for the page.
`/api/v1/import?type=CURL&contextId={contextId}&name=Api1&workspaceId={workspaceId}`
### Client changes
- Integrate api changes for curl import. Updated request params type and
interfaces for the saga functions
- Updated the form value types for the curl import editor
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [[Task]: Curl Import isn't
working.](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30933)
#### Media
> N/A
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual (using postman)
- [x] JUnit (existing test cases should work)
#### Test Plan
> N/A
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> None
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced API import functionality with a new context-aware mechanism,
allowing for more flexible integration within different parts of the
application.
- Updated various components and services to support the new contextId
and contextType parameters for improved data handling and redirection
logic.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ayush Pahwa <ayushpahwa96@gmail.com>
The `.save()` method currently returns the given object as is. But with
Hibernate, it returns the corresponding object from the persistence
store, if any, which _may_ be different. This is causing some very hard
to debug and subtle bugs.
This fix here, to just ignore the result of `.save()` is not a permanent
fix, it's just a workaround that works well in both worlds, MongoDB and
Hibernate. Once we move though, we may need to revisit.
The query execution methods, `queryAllExecute`, `queryOneExecute` etc.,
aren't using the same function to build the `Query` object. This PR
fixes it by using the common function.
But the common function has a problem. Check this out, this is the
current implementation:
```java
Query query = new Query();
criterias.stream().forEach(criteria -> query.addCriteria(criteria));
if (aclPermission == null) {
query.addCriteria(new Criteria().andOperator(notDeleted()));
} else {
query.addCriteria(new Criteria().andOperator(notDeleted(), userAcl(permissionGroups, aclPermission)));
}
if (!isEmpty(projectionFieldNames)) {
projectionFieldNames.stream().forEach(fieldName -> query.fields().include(fieldName));
}
return query;
```
Here, we use `addCriteria` to add each of the criteria items given to
us, into the `query`. After that, we use `.andOperator` to add the
not-deleted and permission checks.
Looks good on the surface. Let's take an example. If the given criteria
list has `fieldName = "abc"` as the condition, this will end up in the
final query as (pseudo-code representation):
```javascript
{
fieldName: "abc",
$and: {
$and: {
deleted: false or missing,
deletedAt: null
},
policies: {
$elemMatch: permission check here,
}
}
}
```
Perfectly working query. Now, what if the incoming criteria list is a
little more complex, and has an `or` condition in it. This is what we
end up with:
```javascript
{
$or: {
field1: "val",
field2: "val"
},
$and: {
$and: {
deleted: false or missing,
deletedAt: null
},
policies: {
$elemMatch: permission check here,
}
}
}
```
We end up with a `$or` and `$and` next to each other. This doesn't make
sense to MongoDB.
The way the query is built in the `queryAllExecute` method previously,
actually doesn't fall into this. That's the version we're changing the
common method into now. This is what it looks like:
```java
final ArrayList<Criteria> criteriaList = new ArrayList<>(criterias);
criteriaList.add(notDeleted());
final Criteria permissionCriteria = userAcl(permissionGroups, aclPermission);
if (permissionCriteria != null) {
criteriaList.add(permissionCriteria);
}
final Query query = new Query(new Criteria().andOperator(criteriaList.toArray(new Criteria[0])));
if (!isEmpty(projectionFieldNames)) {
query.fields().include(projectionFieldNames.toArray(new String[0]));
}
return query;
```
With this, the resulting query looks something like this:
```javascript
{
$and: {
$or: {
field1: "val",
field2: "val"
},
$and: {
deleted: false or missing,
deletedAt: null
},
policies: {
$elemMatch: permission check here,
}
}
}
```
This isn't new code. This is how we've been building the query for
`queryAll` today. By moving this to the common method, we have this
resilient query building for `queryOne` and `queryFirst` as well.
Same as https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/30958, now with a
brand new migration to clean up!
The migration take 1.2 seconds on release and 0.1 seconds on
production-representative databases.
The test has a `@WithUserDetails(value = "admin@solutiontest.com")`
annotation, which means that's the logged-in user for the test's scope.
But the setup method calls `inviteUserToWorkspaceWithViewAccess`, which
tries to invite `usertest@usertest.com` and `admin@solutiontest.com` to
a just-created workspace. But since the workspace was just created by
`admin@solutiontest.com`, that user is already an admin on the workpace.
So we get this error:
```
com.appsmith.server.exceptions.AppsmithException: The user admin@solutiontest.com has already been added to the workspace with role Administrator - Source Workspace. To change the role, please navigate to `Manage users` page.
```
The test method's doesn't even get called. This error is from the
`setup` phase.
This PR fixes it by using `api_user` for the session instead of
`admin@solutiontest.com`.
## Description
This PR adds `expires_in` field for authenticated API datasource. This
field will be used for all OAuth2 datasources, with use of this field
refresh token flow can be triggered.
This fixes the problem of [Salesforce not refreshing the tokens
automatically](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30239).
More about the issue can be found in this
[thread](https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/CNQ9Q91C0/p1702972094026239)
and
[notion](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Salesforce-OAuth2-problem-with-refresh-token-ea4b318eebb3420f89a47d87f94ef49a)
doc.
Server unit tests have been added in this PR itself.
Client unit tests will be added as part of #30829.
**Note: If we populate expires_in field for Monday.com OAuth2 provider,
it will not work as monday does not have refresh token flow.**
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#30830
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to not work as expected)
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
- This change requires a documentation update
>
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Added the ability to specify the expiration time for OAuth2
authorization in seconds when configuring REST API datasources. This
allows users to define how long the authorization should last before
needing a refresh.
- **Enhancements**
- Improved OAuth2 token generation logic to accurately handle expiration
times, enhancing the security and reliability of connections.
- **Tests**
- Updated application forking tests to account for the new OAuth2
authorization expiration time configuration.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”>
The `WorkspacePlugin` is not a top-level entity. Yet, it extends
`BaseDomain`. It gets all the fields from `BaseDomain`, but since it
doesn't have a collection of its own, nothing is ever used.
This is fine today, with the `@Document` annotation, but with Postgres,
with `@Entity` annotation, querydsl is getting confused and is creating
a `QWorkspacePlugin` class, which is producing a compile error in
`QWorkspace.plugins` field.
This PR removes this unneeded inheritance.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Updated the structure of the Workspace Plugin to enhance performance.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Ensured all plugins, including previously inaccessible ones, are now
correctly retrievable.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
Instead of a failure showing up like this:
```
org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
expected: 2
but was: 0
Expected :2
Actual :0
```
We get something like this:
```
java.lang.AssertionError:
Expected size: 2 but was: 0 in:
{}
```
Which is a better insight into the test failure.
## Description
Frontend Changes
- Remove Appsmith AI Query as a default datasource query
- Add Appsmith AI Datasource in the AI section of Datasources screen
- ~~Creation of Appsmith AI datasource to mimic the mock datasource
flow. This was necessary because we are using a trigger in the
datasource edit form and inorder for the trigger to function the
datasource needs to be created before the trigger call.~~ (We are using
the plugin trigger to upload files and hence this change is not required
anymore)
- Add a new Form control element to support multiple file uploads. The
multiple file upload control type can either upload the files to the
trigger end point (multipart-form trigger api) or save the files as
base64 string in the datasource configuration. If the files are uploaded
in the trigger, only the file metadata (name, size, mimeType and id) is
saved in the datasource configuration.
- Fix a bug in Dropdown control. This fix makes sure that the options
that are disabled as infact disabled on the UI.
- Add preview for the new Multi file picker control type.
Backend Changes
- Add a new trigger end point for datasource to support multipart form
data
- Add trigger for Appsmith AI datasource to upload files during
datasource creation/edit flow
- Associate the file ids with the datasourceId in AI Node server
- Add Knowledge retrieval implementation in text generation action for
Appsmith AI datasource
- Add form.json for Appsmith AI Datasource
- Add a fetch files trigger for populating the files in the Text
generate action.
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to not work as expected)
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
- This change requires a documentation update
>
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Introduced a multiple file picker control for users to select and
upload multiple files with options for file types and size limits.
- Added new AI Query functionality with enhanced file upload
capabilities, including timeout settings.
- Enhanced datasource editor to display the number of uploaded files or
a message if no files are uploaded.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Simplified the logic for showing the datasource selector by removing
specific conditions related to the Appsmith AI Plugin.
- **Refactor**
- Removed unused imports and functionalities related to Appsmith AI
across various components.
- Updated plugin handling to dynamically determine button text based on
plugin type.
- **Chores**
- Implemented backend support for file upload and association with
datasources and workspaces.
- Added new utility functions and DTOs for handling file uploads and AI
plugin interactions.
- **Documentation**
- No visible changes to end-users.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Diljit VJ <diljit@appsmith.com>
## Description
Instead of writing only the pages during auto commit, this PR makes the
change to write all the application resources. If there's any migration
change in DSL, the following auto commit will include all the server
side changes due to change in data structures.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#30466
#### Media
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [x] JUnit
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Introduced a new system for tracking and managing updated resources
within applications.
- **Refactor**
- Streamlined the process of checking if specific resources have been
updated.
- Enhanced the logic related to exporting application components such as
action collections, custom JavaScript libraries, and pages.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed issues with resource tracking to ensure accurate reflection of
changes.
- **Tests**
- Added test cases to verify the functionality of the new resource
management system.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
