Add reactions to issues/PR and comments #2856

lafriks · 2017-11-05T11:14:36Z

Screenshots:

For unauthorized users and tooltip to show reacted users:

andreynering · 2017-11-07T10:16:54Z

Seems good.

Just a question to the team: Should it really look almost identical to GitHub's reactions? Or should it be different to don't look like a GitHub's copy?

lafriks · 2017-11-07T10:29:49Z

@andreynering reactions looks same also in other products (mattermost, discord etc)

andreynering · 2017-11-07T10:37:48Z

reactions looks same also in other products (mattermost, discord etc)

Yes, you're right. I think it's fine, then.

lafriks · 2017-11-07T12:58:38Z

As for these 6 reactions and their naming it just for being API compatible with github

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-08T18:13:08Z

models/issue.go

+func (issue *Issue) GetReactionsByType() map[string]ReactionList {
+	var reactions = make(map[string]ReactionList)
+	for _, reaction := range issue.Reactions {
+		list, ok := reactions[reaction.Type]


Can simplify to reactions[reaction.Type] = append(reactions[reaction.Type], reaction)

Also in Comment.GetReactionsByType().

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-08T18:23:35Z

public/less/_repository.less

@@ -1350,6 +1350,40 @@
            }
        }
    }
+    .segment.reactions, .select-reaction {
+        &.dropdown .menu {
+            right: 0!important;


I'm not a CSS expert, but !important is generally considered a bad practice. Are these necessary?

Sadly but it's needed as semantic UI is full of these :(

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-08T18:38:58Z

routers/repo/issue.go

+		return
+	}
+
+	if ctx.HasError() {


What does this if block accomplish?

I think yes but I will verify. It's to check if there is form validation error

I'm still confused as to why this if block is necessary

bkcsoft · 2017-11-09T18:35:46Z

models/issue_reaction.go

+	ID          int64     `xorm:"pk autoincr"`
+	Type        string    `xorm:"INDEX UNIQUE(s) NOT NULL"`
+	IssueID     int64     `xorm:"INDEX UNIQUE(s) NOT NULL"`
+	CommentID   int64     `xorm:"INDEX UNIQUE(s)"`


Foreign key please? 😄

@bkcsoft IIRC, xorm does not support foreign keys 😢

And what also I don't quite like it inserts 0 values for IDs where it would normally should be null

Why would it ever insert 0/null ? It would throw foreign key constrain and that would be that 😛

lunny · 2017-11-21T01:18:23Z

@lafriks It's ready for review so that we can add it to v1.4?

lafriks · 2017-11-21T04:34:21Z

@lunny still WIP, will finish it this week

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-23T18:26:52Z

templates/repo/issue/view_content/comments.tmpl

@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
 								{{end}}
 							</div>
 						{{end}}
+						{{template "repo/issue/view_content/reactions" Dict "ctx" $ "ActionURL" (Printf "%s/issues/%d/comment/%d/reactions" $.RepoLink $.Issue.Index .ID) "Reactions" .GetReactionsByType }}


Why can't we just do {{template "repo/issue/view_content/reactions" .}} like we do elsewhere?

@ethantkoenig because this template needs to be used in loop and loop variable needs to be passed to that template

Oh I see. On another note, there aren't handlers for the :owner/:repo/issues/:index/comments/:id/reactions route, so trying to add a reaction to a comment always results in a 404.

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-24T06:13:22Z

public/js/index.js

+    $(container + '.select-reaction > .menu > .item').on('click', function(e){
+        e.preventDefault();
+        var url = $(this).closest('.select-reaction').data('action-url')
+            + '/' + ($(this).hasClass('is-active') ? 'unreact' : 'react');


This is-active class isn't used anywhere, so the action is always react, and it's impossible to unreact.

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-24T06:15:48Z

templates/repo/issue/view_content/reactions.tmpl

+	{{range $key, $value := .Reactions}}
+		<a class="ui label basic{{if $value.HasUser $.ctx.SignedUserID}} blue{{end}} has-emoji">
+			{{if eq $key "hooray"}}
+				:tada:


There are no js handlers for clicking on these

Yes, unreacting is not yet implemented :)

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-24T06:17:16Z

templates/repo/issue/view_content/comments.tmpl

@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
 								{{end}}
 							</div>
 						{{end}}
+						{{template "repo/issue/view_content/reactions" Dict "ctx" $ "ActionURL" (Printf "%s/issues/%d/comment/%d/reactions" $.RepoLink $.Issue.Index .ID) "Reactions" .GetReactionsByType }}


Oh I see. On another note, there aren't handlers for the :owner/:repo/issues/:index/comments/:id/reactions route, so trying to add a reaction to a comment always results in a 404.

ethantkoenig · 2017-11-24T06:32:21Z

templates/repo/issue/view_content.tmpl

@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
 					<div class="ui top attached header">
 						<span class="text grey"><a {{if gt .Issue.Poster.ID 0}}href="{{.Issue.Poster.HomeLink}}"{{end}}>{{.Issue.Poster.Name}}</a> {{.i18n.Tr "repo.issues.commented_at" .Issue.HashTag $createdStr | Safe}}</span>
 						<div class="ui right actions">
+							{{template "repo/issue/view_content/reactions" Dict "ctx" $ "ActionURL" (Printf "%s/issues/%d/reactions" $.RepoLink .Issue.Index) "Reactions" .GetReactionsByType }}


.GetReactionsByType is not defined in the current context, so .GetReactionsByType will evaluate to nil.

In this case, it gets us what we want (we don't want to show the current reactions in the issue header, just the button for adding reactions, and the reactions template won't render the current reactions if Reactions is nil), but this is confusing and non-obvious.

Can we make this more straightforward? My proposal would be to have two separate templates: one for displaying the current reaction, and another template for the button/pop-out to add new reactions. In the issue header, we would only use the second template, but in other places we would use both.

lafriks · 2017-11-27T19:43:28Z

Ok, I think I have finished it now, so feel free to test and review it.

lafriks · 2017-11-27T20:04:44Z

@ethantkoenig I think have fixed all recommendations

codecov-io · 2017-11-27T20:05:08Z

Codecov Report

Merging #2856 into master will decrease coverage by 0.14%.
The diff coverage is 12.85%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2856      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   33.43%   33.29%   -0.15%     
==========================================
  Files         270      272       +2     
  Lines       39595    39939     +344     
==========================================
+ Hits        13239    13297      +58     
- Misses      24466    24741     +275     
- Partials     1890     1901      +11

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
models/migrations/migrations.go	`2.9% <ø> (ø)`	⬆️
modules/setting/setting.go	`46.93% <ø> (ø)`	⬆️
models/issue_comment.go	`51.62% <0%> (-2.12%)`	⬇️
models/helper.go	`66.66% <0%> (-33.34%)`	⬇️
modules/auth/repo_form.go	`32% <0%> (-0.88%)`	⬇️
models/migrations/v50.go	`0% <0%> (ø)`
models/user.go	`40.45% <100%> (+0.06%)`	⬆️
models/models.go	`49.56% <100%> (+0.22%)`	⬆️
modules/context/context.go	`49.65% <100%> (ø)`	⬆️
routers/routes/routes.go	`87.03% <100%> (+0.04%)`	⬆️
... and 8 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e59adcd...3410384. Read the comment docs.

lunny · 2017-11-28T01:52:16Z

models/issue.go

@@ -808,6 +835,15 @@ func (issue *Issue) ChangeAssignee(doer *User, assigneeID int64) (err error) {
 	return nil
 }

+// GetReactionsByType returns issue reactions grouped by type
+func (issue *Issue) GetReactionsByType() map[string]ReactionList {


Maybe GetReactionsMap or GetReactionsGroupByType better name.

lunny · 2017-11-28T01:52:50Z

models/issue_comment.go

+}
+
+// GetReactionsByType returns comment reactions grouped by type
+func (c *Comment) GetReactionsByType() map[string]ReactionList {


The same as above

Or maybe

func (reactions ReactionList) GroupByType() map[string]ReactionList { var returns = make(map[string]ReactionList) for _, reaction := range reactions { returns[reaction.Type] = append(returns[reaction.Type], reaction) } return returns }

And you can remove the above two methods.

lunny · 2017-11-28T02:47:55Z

It seems it's not correct popup.

lunny · 2017-11-28T02:50:57Z

And when click the reations, no request was sent to server.

lafriks · 2017-11-28T05:00:15Z

@lunny did you do Ctrl+f5 seems css&js was used from browser cache

lunny · 2017-11-28T05:25:11Z

firefox and safari on macOS are almost right. But on safari, see above screenshot. I will clear chrome cache and try it again.

lunny · 2017-12-03T02:36:42Z

@lafriks need rebase

lafriks · 2017-12-03T11:56:08Z

@ethantkoenig rebased and fixed your reported issues

lunny · 2017-12-03T13:55:58Z

Lint error

lafriks · 2017-12-03T14:47:36Z

@lunny already fixed that but drone did not pick up latest commit correctly :(

ethantkoenig · 2017-12-03T20:13:57Z

@lafriks You get a 500 if you view an issue that a deleted user reacted to. I think we need to delete all of a user's reactions when a user deletes his/her account.

bkcsoft · 2017-12-03T20:30:34Z

I think we need to delete all of a user's reactions when a user deletes his/her account.

Hence foreign keys...

bkcsoft · 2017-12-03T20:31:19Z

go-xorm/xorm#73

lafriks · 2017-12-03T21:11:20Z

@ethantkoenig @bkcsoft Added checks for deleted user and reaction deletion when deleting user

ethantkoenig

One nit

ethantkoenig · 2017-12-03T21:48:34Z

models/issue_reaction.go

+// GetFirstUsers returns first 10 reacted user display names seperated by comma
+func (list ReactionList) GetFirstUsers() string {
+	var buffer bytes.Buffer
+	var rem = 10


Move to a named constant, since it is used multiple places?

lafriks · 2017-12-03T22:22:25Z

@ethantkoenig moved that hardcoded limit to UI settings

ethantkoenig · 2017-12-03T22:24:26Z

LGTM

lafriks · 2017-12-03T22:42:01Z

@ethantkoenig need your approval

ethantkoenig

Forgot to approve 😛

ethantkoenig · 2017-12-03T23:07:26Z

@lafriks I don't mean to unnecessarily delay this PR, but it is too late to ask for tests?

lafriks · 2017-12-03T23:08:23Z

@ethantkoenig I will do them in other PR

lafriks added type/feature Completely new functionality. Can only be merged if feature freeze is not active. pr/wip This PR is not ready for review labels Nov 5, 2017

lafriks added this to the 1.x.x milestone Nov 5, 2017

tboerger added the lgtm/need 2 This PR needs two approvals by maintainers to be considered for merging. label Nov 7, 2017

ethantkoenig suggested changes Nov 8, 2017

View reviewed changes

bkcsoft reviewed Nov 9, 2017

View reviewed changes

ethantkoenig suggested changes Nov 23, 2017

View reviewed changes

ethantkoenig suggested changes Nov 24, 2017

View reviewed changes

lafriks force-pushed the feat/comment_reactions branch 4 times, most recently from 8133bce to 23a2415 Compare November 27, 2017 19:39

lafriks removed the pr/wip This PR is not ready for review label Nov 27, 2017

lafriks modified the milestones: 1.x.x, 1.4.0 Nov 27, 2017

lunny reviewed Nov 28, 2017

View reviewed changes

lafriks force-pushed the feat/comment_reactions branch from 77a3728 to 5460507 Compare December 3, 2017 11:52

lafriks force-pushed the feat/comment_reactions branch from 762066c to 285a810 Compare December 3, 2017 21:09

ethantkoenig reviewed Dec 3, 2017

View reviewed changes

Add reactions to issues, pull requests and comments

d2add53

lafriks force-pushed the feat/comment_reactions branch from 8b76f5a to d2add53 Compare December 3, 2017 22:21

tboerger added lgtm/done This PR has enough approvals to get merged. There are no important open reservations anymore. and removed lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. labels Dec 3, 2017

lafriks force-pushed the feat/comment_reactions branch from cc58235 to d2add53 Compare December 3, 2017 22:29

Merge branch 'master' into feat/comment_reactions

5011a9e

ethantkoenig approved these changes Dec 3, 2017

View reviewed changes

lafriks added 2 commits December 4, 2017 00:52

Merge branch 'master' into feat/comment_reactions

a0d1e05

Add Reactions to docs

3410384

lafriks merged commit 5dc37b1 into go-gitea:master Dec 3, 2017

lafriks deleted the feat/comment_reactions branch December 3, 2017 23:14

lafriks mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2017

Tests for reactions #3083

Merged

lafriks mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2017

+1, -1, and other reactions on issues and issue comments #1232

Closed

go-gitea locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 23, 2020

Add reactions to issues/PR and comments #2856

Add reactions to issues/PR and comments #2856

Conversation

lafriks commented Nov 5, 2017 • edited Loading

andreynering commented Nov 7, 2017

lafriks commented Nov 7, 2017

andreynering commented Nov 7, 2017

lafriks commented Nov 7, 2017

ethantkoenig Nov 8, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lunny commented Nov 21, 2017

lafriks commented Nov 21, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lafriks commented Nov 27, 2017

lafriks commented Nov 27, 2017

codecov-io commented Nov 27, 2017 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lunny commented Nov 28, 2017

lunny commented Nov 28, 2017

lafriks commented Nov 28, 2017

lunny commented Nov 28, 2017

lunny commented Dec 3, 2017

lafriks commented Dec 3, 2017

lunny commented Dec 3, 2017

lafriks commented Dec 3, 2017

ethantkoenig commented Dec 3, 2017

bkcsoft commented Dec 3, 2017

bkcsoft commented Dec 3, 2017

lafriks commented Dec 3, 2017

ethantkoenig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lafriks commented Dec 3, 2017

ethantkoenig commented Dec 3, 2017

lafriks commented Dec 3, 2017

ethantkoenig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ethantkoenig commented Dec 3, 2017

lafriks commented Dec 3, 2017

lafriks commented Nov 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

ethantkoenig Nov 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

codecov-io commented Nov 27, 2017 •

edited

Loading