Ghost/core/server/models/post.js

983 lines
39 KiB
JavaScript
Raw Normal View History

// # Post Model
const _ = require('lodash');
const uuid = require('uuid');
const moment = require('moment');
const Promise = require('bluebird');
const sequence = require('../lib/promise/sequence');
const common = require('../lib/common');
const htmlToText = require('html-to-text');
const ghostBookshelf = require('./base');
const config = require('../config');
const settingsCache = require('../services/settings/cache');
const converters = require('../lib/mobiledoc/converters');
const relations = require('./relations');
const urlUtils = require('../lib/url-utils');
const MOBILEDOC_REVISIONS_COUNT = 10;
const ALL_STATUSES = ['published', 'draft', 'scheduled'];
let Post;
let Posts;
Post = ghostBookshelf.Model.extend({
tableName: 'posts',
/**
* @NOTE
*
* We define the defaults on the schema (db) and model level.
*
* Why?
* - when you insert a resource, Knex does only return the id of the created resource
* - see https://knexjs.org/#Builder-insert
* - that means `defaultTo` is a pure database configuration (!)
* - Bookshelf just returns the model values which you have asked Bookshelf to insert
* - it can't return the `defaultTo` value from the schema/db level
* - but the db defaults defined in the schema are saved in the database correctly
* - `models.Post.add` always does to operations:
* 1. add
* 2. fetch (this ensures we fetch the whole resource from the database)
* - that means we have to apply the defaults on the model layer to ensure a complete field set
* 1. any connected logic in our model hooks e.g. beforeSave
* 2. model events e.g. "post.published" are using the inserted resource, not the fetched resource
*/
defaults: function defaults() {
let visibility = 'public';
if (settingsCache.get('labs') && (settingsCache.get('labs').members === true) && settingsCache.get('default_content_visibility')) {
visibility = settingsCache.get('default_content_visibility');
}
return {
uuid: uuid.v4(),
status: 'draft',
featured: false,
type: 'post',
visibility: visibility
};
},
relationships: ['tags', 'authors', 'mobiledoc_revisions', 'posts_meta'],
// NOTE: look up object, not super nice, but was easy to implement
relationshipBelongsTo: {
tags: 'tags',
authors: 'users',
posts_meta: 'posts_meta'
},
/**
* The base model keeps only the columns, which are defined in the schema.
* We have to add the relations on top, otherwise bookshelf-relations
* has no access to the nested relations, which should be updated.
*/
permittedAttributes: function permittedAttributes() {
let filteredKeys = ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.permittedAttributes.apply(this, arguments);
this.relationships.forEach((key) => {
filteredKeys.push(key);
});
return filteredKeys;
},
emitChange: function emitChange(event, options = {}) {
let eventToTrigger;
let resourceType = this.get('type');
if (options.usePreviousAttribute) {
resourceType = this.previous('type');
}
eventToTrigger = resourceType + '.' + event;
ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.emitChange.bind(this)(this, eventToTrigger, options);
},
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
/**
* We update the tags after the Post was inserted.
* We update the tags before the Post was updated, see `onSaving` event.
* `onCreated` is called before `onSaved`.
*
* `onSaved` is the last event in the line - triggered for updating or inserting data.
* bookshelf-relations listens on `created` + `updated`.
* We ensure that we are catching the event after bookshelf relations.
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
*/
onSaved: function onSaved(model, response, options) {
ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.onSaved.apply(this, arguments);
if (options.method !== 'insert') {
return;
}
var status = model.get('status');
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
model.emitChange('added', options);
if (['published', 'scheduled'].indexOf(status) !== -1) {
model.emitChange(status, options);
}
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
},
onUpdated: function onUpdated(model, attrs, options) {
ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.onUpdated.apply(this, arguments);
model.statusChanging = model.get('status') !== model.previous('status');
model.isPublished = model.get('status') === 'published';
model.isScheduled = model.get('status') === 'scheduled';
model.wasPublished = model.previous('status') === 'published';
model.wasScheduled = model.previous('status') === 'scheduled';
model.resourceTypeChanging = model.get('type') !== model.previous('type');
model.publishedAtHasChanged = model.hasDateChanged('published_at');
model.needsReschedule = model.publishedAtHasChanged && model.isScheduled;
// Handle added and deleted for post -> page or page -> post
if (model.resourceTypeChanging) {
if (model.wasPublished) {
model.emitChange('unpublished', Object.assign({usePreviousAttribute: true}, options));
}
if (model.wasScheduled) {
model.emitChange('unscheduled', Object.assign({usePreviousAttribute: true}, options));
}
model.emitChange('deleted', Object.assign({usePreviousAttribute: true}, options));
model.emitChange('added', options);
if (model.isPublished) {
model.emitChange('published', options);
}
if (model.isScheduled) {
model.emitChange('scheduled', options);
}
} else {
if (model.statusChanging) {
// CASE: was published before and is now e.q. draft or scheduled
if (model.wasPublished) {
model.emitChange('unpublished', options);
}
// CASE: was draft or scheduled before and is now e.q. published
if (model.isPublished) {
model.emitChange('published', options);
}
// CASE: was draft or published before and is now e.q. scheduled
if (model.isScheduled) {
model.emitChange('scheduled', options);
}
// CASE: from scheduled to something
if (model.wasScheduled && !model.isScheduled && !model.isPublished) {
model.emitChange('unscheduled', options);
}
} else {
if (model.isPublished) {
model.emitChange('published.edited', options);
}
if (model.needsReschedule) {
model.emitChange('rescheduled', options);
}
}
// Fire edited if this wasn't a change between resourceType
model.emitChange('edited', options);
}
if (model.statusChanging && (model.isPublished || model.wasPublished)) {
this.handleStatusForAttachedModels(model, options);
}
},
onDestroyed: function onDestroyed(model, options) {
ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.onDestroyed.apply(this, arguments);
if (model.previous('status') === 'published') {
model.emitChange('unpublished', Object.assign({usePreviousAttribute: true}, options));
}
model.emitChange('deleted', Object.assign({usePreviousAttribute: true}, options));
},
onDestroying: function onDestroyed(model) {
ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.onDestroying.apply(this, arguments);
this.handleAttachedModels(model);
},
handleAttachedModels: function handleAttachedModels(model) {
/**
* @NOTE:
* Bookshelf only exposes the object that is being detached on `detaching`.
* For the reason above, `detached` handler is using the scope of `detaching`
* to access the models that are not present in `detached`.
*/
model.related('tags').once('detaching', function onDetached(collection, tag) {
model.related('tags').once('detached', function onDetached(detachedCollection, response, options) {
tag.emitChange('detached', options);
model.emitChange('tag.detached', options);
});
});
model.related('tags').once('attaching', function onDetached(collection, tags) {
model.related('tags').once('attached', function onDetached(detachedCollection, response, options) {
tags.forEach((tag) => {
tag.emitChange('attached', options);
model.emitChange('tag.attached', options);
});
});
});
model.related('authors').once('detaching', function onDetached(collection, author) {
model.related('authors').once('detached', function onDetached(detachedCollection, response, options) {
author.emitChange('detached', options);
});
});
model.related('authors').once('attaching', function onDetached(collection, authors) {
model.related('authors').once('attached', function onDetached(detachedCollection, response, options) {
authors.forEach(author => author.emitChange('attached', options));
});
});
},
/**
* @NOTE:
* when status is changed from or to 'published' all related authors and tags
* have to trigger recalculation in URL service because status is applied in filters for
* these models
*/
handleStatusForAttachedModels: function handleStatusForAttachedModels(model, options) {
model.related('tags').forEach((tag) => {
tag.emitChange('attached', options);
});
model.related('authors').forEach((author) => {
author.emitChange('attached', options);
});
},
onSaving: function onSaving(model, attr, options) {
options = options || {};
var self = this,
title,
i,
// Variables to make the slug checking more readable
newTitle = this.get('title'),
newStatus = this.get('status'),
olderStatus = this.previous('status'),
prevTitle = this.previous('title'),
prevSlug = this.previous('slug'),
publishedAt = this.get('published_at'),
publishedAtHasChanged = this.hasDateChanged('published_at', {beforeWrite: true}),
generatedFields = ['html', 'plaintext'],
tagsToSave,
ops = [];
// CASE: disallow published -> scheduled
// @TODO: remove when we have versioning based on updated_at
if (newStatus !== olderStatus && newStatus === 'scheduled' && olderStatus === 'published') {
return Promise.reject(new common.errors.ValidationError({
message: common.i18n.t('errors.models.post.isAlreadyPublished', {key: 'status'})
}));
}
if (options.method === 'insert') {
if (!this.get('comment_id')) {
this.set('comment_id', this.id);
}
}
// CASE: both page and post can get scheduled
if (newStatus === 'scheduled') {
if (!publishedAt) {
return Promise.reject(new common.errors.ValidationError({
message: common.i18n.t('errors.models.post.valueCannotBeBlank', {key: 'published_at'})
}));
} else if (!moment(publishedAt).isValid()) {
return Promise.reject(new common.errors.ValidationError({
message: common.i18n.t('errors.models.post.valueCannotBeBlank', {key: 'published_at'})
}));
// CASE: to schedule/reschedule a post, a minimum diff of x minutes is needed (default configured is 2minutes)
} else if (
publishedAtHasChanged &&
moment(publishedAt).isBefore(moment().add(config.get('times').cannotScheduleAPostBeforeInMinutes, 'minutes')) &&
!options.importing &&
(!options.context || !options.context.internal)
) {
return Promise.reject(new common.errors.ValidationError({
message: common.i18n.t('errors.models.post.expectedPublishedAtInFuture', {
cannotScheduleAPostBeforeInMinutes: config.get('times').cannotScheduleAPostBeforeInMinutes
})
}));
}
}
// CASE: detect lowercase/uppercase tag slugs
if (!_.isUndefined(this.get('tags')) && !_.isNull(this.get('tags'))) {
tagsToSave = [];
// and deduplicate upper/lowercase tags
_.each(this.get('tags'), function each(item) {
for (i = 0; i < tagsToSave.length; i = i + 1) {
if (tagsToSave[i].name && item.name && tagsToSave[i].name.toLocaleLowerCase() === item.name.toLocaleLowerCase()) {
return;
}
}
tagsToSave.push(item);
});
this.set('tags', tagsToSave);
}
/**
* CASE: Attach id to update existing posts_meta entry for a post
* CASE: Don't create new posts_meta entry if post meta is empty
*/
if (!_.isUndefined(this.get('posts_meta')) && !_.isNull(this.get('posts_meta'))) {
let postsMetaData = this.get('posts_meta');
let relatedModelId = model.related('posts_meta').get('id');
let hasNoData = !_.values(postsMetaData).some(x => !!x);
if (relatedModelId && !_.isEmpty(postsMetaData)) {
postsMetaData.id = relatedModelId;
this.set('posts_meta', postsMetaData);
} else if (_.isEmpty(postsMetaData) || hasNoData) {
this.set('posts_meta', null);
}
}
this.handleAttachedModels(model);
ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.onSaving.apply(this, arguments);
// do not allow generated fields to be overridden via the API
if (!options.migrating) {
generatedFields.forEach((field) => {
if (this.hasChanged(field)) {
this.set(field, this.previous(field));
}
});
}
if (!this.get('mobiledoc')) {
this.set('mobiledoc', JSON.stringify(converters.mobiledocConverter.blankStructure()));
}
// ensure all URLs are stored as relative
// note: html is not necessary to change because it's a generated later from mobiledoc
const urlTransformMap = {
mobiledoc: 'mobiledocAbsoluteToRelative',
custom_excerpt: 'htmlAbsoluteToRelative',
codeinjection_head: 'htmlAbsoluteToRelative',
codeinjection_foot: 'htmlAbsoluteToRelative',
feature_image: 'absoluteToRelative',
og_image: 'absoluteToRelative',
twitter_image: 'absoluteToRelative',
canonical_url: {
method: 'absoluteToRelative',
options: {
ignoreProtocol: false
}
}
};
Object.entries(urlTransformMap).forEach(([attr, transform]) => {
let method = transform;
let options = {};
if (typeof transform === 'object') {
method = transform.method;
options = transform.options || {};
}
if (this.hasChanged(attr) && this.get(attr)) {
const transformedValue = urlUtils[method](this.get(attr), options);
this.set(attr, transformedValue);
}
});
// CASE: mobiledoc has changed, generate html
// CASE: html is null, but mobiledoc exists (only important for migrations & importing)
if (this.hasChanged('mobiledoc') || (!this.get('html') && (options.migrating || options.importing))) {
try {
this.set('html', converters.mobiledocConverter.render(JSON.parse(this.get('mobiledoc'))));
} catch (err) {
throw new common.errors.ValidationError({
message: 'Invalid mobiledoc structure.',
help: 'https://ghost.org/docs/concepts/posts/'
});
}
}
if (this.hasChanged('html') || !this.get('plaintext')) {
const plaintext = htmlToText.fromString(this.get('html'), {
wordwrap: 80,
ignoreImage: true,
hideLinkHrefIfSameAsText: true,
preserveNewlines: true,
returnDomByDefault: true,
uppercaseHeadings: false
});
// CASE: html is e.g. <p></p>
// @NOTE: Otherwise we will always update the resource to `plaintext: ''` and Bookshelf thinks that this
// value was modified.
if (plaintext || plaintext !== this.get('plaintext')) {
this.set('plaintext', plaintext);
}
}
2013-06-01 18:47:41 +04:00
// disabling sanitization until we can implement a better version
🎨 refactor the importer (#8473) refs #5422 - we can support null titles after this PR if we want - user model: fix getAuthorRole - user model: support adding roles by name - we support this for roles as well, this makes it easier when importing related user roles (because usually roles already exists in the database and the related id's are wrong e.g. roles_users) - base model: support for null created_at or updated_at values - post or tag slugs are always safe strings - enable an import of a null slug, no need to crash or to cover this on import layer - add new DataImporter logic - uses a class inheritance mechanism to achieve an easier readability and maintenance - schema validation (happens on model layer) was ignored - allow to import unknown user id's (see https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/issues/8365) - most of the duplication handling happens on model layer (we can use the power of unique fields and errors from the database) - the import is splitted into three steps: - beforeImport --> prepares the data to import, sorts out relations (roles, tags), detects fields (for LTS) - doImport --> does the actual import - afterImport --> updates the data after successful import e.g. update all user reference fields e.g. published_by (compares the imported data with the current state of the database) - import images: markdown can be null - show error message when json handler can't parse file - do not request gravatar if email is null - return problems/warnings after successful import - optimise warnings in importer - do not return warnings for role duplications, no helpful information - error handler: return context information of error - we show the affected json entries as one line in the UI - show warning for: detected duplicated tag - schema validation: fix valueMustBeBoolean translation - remove context property from json parse error
2017-05-23 19:18:13 +03:00
if (!options.importing) {
title = this.get('title') || common.i18n.t('errors.models.post.untitled');
🎨 refactor the importer (#8473) refs #5422 - we can support null titles after this PR if we want - user model: fix getAuthorRole - user model: support adding roles by name - we support this for roles as well, this makes it easier when importing related user roles (because usually roles already exists in the database and the related id's are wrong e.g. roles_users) - base model: support for null created_at or updated_at values - post or tag slugs are always safe strings - enable an import of a null slug, no need to crash or to cover this on import layer - add new DataImporter logic - uses a class inheritance mechanism to achieve an easier readability and maintenance - schema validation (happens on model layer) was ignored - allow to import unknown user id's (see https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/issues/8365) - most of the duplication handling happens on model layer (we can use the power of unique fields and errors from the database) - the import is splitted into three steps: - beforeImport --> prepares the data to import, sorts out relations (roles, tags), detects fields (for LTS) - doImport --> does the actual import - afterImport --> updates the data after successful import e.g. update all user reference fields e.g. published_by (compares the imported data with the current state of the database) - import images: markdown can be null - show error message when json handler can't parse file - do not request gravatar if email is null - return problems/warnings after successful import - optimise warnings in importer - do not return warnings for role duplications, no helpful information - error handler: return context information of error - we show the affected json entries as one line in the UI - show warning for: detected duplicated tag - schema validation: fix valueMustBeBoolean translation - remove context property from json parse error
2017-05-23 19:18:13 +03:00
this.set('title', _.toString(title).trim());
}
// ### Business logic for published_at and published_by
// If the current status is 'published' and published_at is not set, set it to now
if (newStatus === 'published' && !publishedAt) {
this.set('published_at', new Date());
}
// If the current status is 'published' and the status has just changed ensure published_by is set correctly
if (newStatus === 'published' && this.hasChanged('status')) {
// unless published_by is set and we're importing, set published_by to contextUser
if (!(this.get('published_by') && options.importing)) {
this.set('published_by', String(this.contextUser(options)));
}
} else {
// In any other case (except import), `published_by` should not be changed
if (this.hasChanged('published_by') && !options.importing) {
this.set('published_by', this.previous('published_by') ? String(this.previous('published_by')) : null);
}
}
// If a title is set, not the same as the old title, a draft post, and has never been published
if (prevTitle !== undefined && newTitle !== prevTitle && newStatus === 'draft' && !publishedAt) {
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
ops.push(function updateSlug() {
// Pass the new slug through the generator to strip illegal characters, detect duplicates
return ghostBookshelf.Model.generateSlug(Post, self.get('title'),
{status: 'all', transacting: options.transacting, importing: options.importing})
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
.then(function then(slug) {
// After the new slug is found, do another generate for the old title to compare it to the old slug
return ghostBookshelf.Model.generateSlug(Post, prevTitle,
{status: 'all', transacting: options.transacting, importing: options.importing}
).then(function then(prevTitleSlug) {
// If the old slug is the same as the slug that was generated from the old title
// then set a new slug. If it is not the same, means was set by the user
if (prevTitleSlug === prevSlug) {
self.set({slug: slug});
}
});
});
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
});
} else {
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
ops.push(function updateSlug() {
// If any of the attributes above were false, set initial slug and check to see if slug was changed by the user
if (self.hasChanged('slug') || !self.get('slug')) {
// Pass the new slug through the generator to strip illegal characters, detect duplicates
return ghostBookshelf.Model.generateSlug(Post, self.get('slug') || self.get('title'),
{status: 'all', transacting: options.transacting, importing: options.importing})
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
.then(function then(slug) {
self.set({slug: slug});
});
}
return Promise.resolve();
});
}
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
// CASE: Handle mobiledoc backups/revisions. This is a pure database feature.
if (model.hasChanged('mobiledoc') && !options.importing && !options.migrating) {
ops.push(function updateRevisions() {
return ghostBookshelf.model('MobiledocRevision')
.findAll(Object.assign({
filter: `post_id:${model.id}`,
columns: ['id']
}, _.pick(options, 'transacting')))
.then((revisions) => {
/**
* Store prev + latest mobiledoc content, because we have decided against a migration, which
* iterates over all posts and creates a copy of the current mobiledoc content.
*
* Reasons:
* - usually migrations for the post table are slow and error-prone
* - there is no need to create a copy for all posts now, because we only want to ensure
* that posts, which you are currently working on, are getting a content backup
* - no need to create revisions for existing published posts
*
* The feature is very minimal in the beginning. As soon as you update to this Ghost version,
* you
*/
if (!revisions.length && options.method !== 'insert') {
model.set('mobiledoc_revisions', [{
post_id: model.id,
mobiledoc: model.previous('mobiledoc'),
created_at_ts: Date.now() - 1
}, {
post_id: model.id,
mobiledoc: model.get('mobiledoc'),
created_at_ts: Date.now()
}]);
} else {
const revisionsJSON = revisions.toJSON().slice(0, MOBILEDOC_REVISIONS_COUNT - 1);
model.set('mobiledoc_revisions', revisionsJSON.concat([{
post_id: model.id,
mobiledoc: model.get('mobiledoc'),
created_at_ts: Date.now()
}]));
}
});
});
}
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
return sequence(ops);
},
2013-06-01 18:47:41 +04:00
created_by: function createdBy() {
return this.belongsTo('User', 'created_by');
},
updated_by: function updatedBy() {
return this.belongsTo('User', 'updated_by');
},
published_by: function publishedBy() {
return this.belongsTo('User', 'published_by');
},
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
authors: function authors() {
return this.belongsToMany('User', 'posts_authors', 'post_id', 'author_id')
.withPivot('sort_order')
.query('orderBy', 'sort_order', 'ASC');
},
tags: function tags() {
return this.belongsToMany('Tag', 'posts_tags', 'post_id', 'tag_id')
.withPivot('sort_order')
.query('orderBy', 'sort_order', 'ASC');
},
fields: function fields() {
return this.morphMany('AppField', 'relatable');
},
mobiledoc_revisions() {
return this.hasMany('MobiledocRevision', 'post_id');
},
posts_meta: function postsMeta() {
return this.hasOne('PostsMeta', 'post_id');
},
/**
* @NOTE:
* If you are requesting models with `columns`, you try to only receive some fields of the model/s.
* But the model layer is complex and needs specific fields in specific situations.
*
* ### url generation was removed but default columns need to be checked before removal
* - @TODO: with dynamic routing, we no longer need default columns to fetch
* - because with static routing Ghost generated the url on runtime and needed the following attributes:
* - `slug`: /:slug/
* - `published_at`: /:year/:slug
* - `author_id`: /:author/:slug, /:primary_author/:slug
* - now, the UrlService pre-generates urls based on the resources
* - you can ask `urlService.getUrlByResourceId(post.id)`
*
* ### events
* - you call `findAll` with `columns: id`
* - then you trigger `post.save()` on the response
* - bookshelf events (`onSaving`) and model events (`emitChange`) are triggered
* - but you only fetched the id column, this will trouble (!), because the event hooks require more
* data than just the id
* - @TODO: we need to disallow this (!)
* - you should use `models.Post.edit(..)`
* - this disallows using the `columns` option
* - same for destroy - you should use `models.Post.destroy(...)`
*
* @IMPORTANT: This fn should **never** be used when updating models (models.Post.edit)!
* Because the events for updating a resource require most of the fields.
* This is protected by the fn `permittedOptions`.
*/
defaultColumnsToFetch: function defaultColumnsToFetch() {
return ['id', 'published_at', 'slug', 'author_id'];
},
/**
* If the `formats` option is not used, we return `html` be default.
* Otherwise we return what is requested e.g. `?formats=mobiledoc,plaintext`
*/
formatsToJSON: function formatsToJSON(attrs, options) {
var defaultFormats = ['html'],
formatsToKeep = options.formats || defaultFormats;
// Iterate over all known formats, and if they are not in the keep list, remove them
_.each(Post.allowedFormats, function (format) {
if (formatsToKeep.indexOf(format) === -1) {
delete attrs[format];
}
});
return attrs;
},
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
toJSON: function toJSON(unfilteredOptions) {
var options = Post.filterOptions(unfilteredOptions, 'toJSON'),
attrs = ghostBookshelf.Model.prototype.toJSON.call(this, options);
attrs = this.formatsToJSON(attrs, options);
// CASE: never expose the revisions
delete attrs.mobiledoc_revisions;
// If the current column settings allow it...
if (!options.columns || (options.columns && options.columns.indexOf('primary_tag') > -1)) {
// ... attach a computed property of primary_tag which is the first tag if it is public, else null
if (attrs.tags && attrs.tags.length > 0 && attrs.tags[0].visibility === 'public') {
attrs.primary_tag = attrs.tags[0];
} else {
attrs.primary_tag = null;
}
}
return attrs;
},
enforcedFilters: function enforcedFilters(options) {
return options.context && options.context.public ? 'status:published' : null;
},
defaultFilters: function defaultFilters(options) {
if (options.context && options.context.internal) {
return null;
}
return options.context && options.context.public ? 'type:post' : 'type:post+status:published';
},
/**
* You can pass an extra `status=VALUES` field.
* Long-Term: We should deprecate these short cuts and force users to use the filter param.
*/
extraFilters: function extraFilters(options) {
if (!options.status) {
return null;
}
let filter = null;
// CASE: "status" is passed, combine filters
if (options.status && options.status !== 'all') {
options.status = _.includes(ALL_STATUSES, options.status) ? options.status : 'published';
if (!filter) {
filter = `status:${options.status}`;
} else {
filter = `${filter}+status:${options.status}`;
}
} else if (options.status === 'all') {
if (!filter) {
filter = `status:[${ALL_STATUSES}]`;
} else {
filter = `${filter}+status:[${ALL_STATUSES}]`;
}
}
delete options.status;
return filter;
},
getAction(event, options) {
const actor = this.getActor(options);
// @NOTE: we ignore internal updates (`options.context.internal`) for now
if (!actor) {
return;
}
// @TODO: implement context
return {
event: event,
resource_id: this.id || this.previous('id'),
resource_type: 'post',
actor_id: actor.id,
actor_type: actor.type
};
}
}, {
allowedFormats: ['mobiledoc', 'html', 'plaintext'],
orderDefaultOptions: function orderDefaultOptions() {
return {
status: 'ASC',
published_at: 'DESC',
updated_at: 'DESC',
id: 'DESC'
};
},
orderDefaultRaw: function (options) {
let order = '' +
'CASE WHEN posts.status = \'scheduled\' THEN 1 ' +
'WHEN posts.status = \'draft\' THEN 2 ' +
'ELSE 3 END ASC,' +
'CASE WHEN posts.status != \'draft\' THEN posts.published_at END DESC,' +
'posts.updated_at DESC,' +
'posts.id DESC';
// CASE: if the filter contains an `IN` operator, we should return the posts first, which match both tags
if (options.filter && options.filter.match(/(tags|tag):\s?\[.*\]/)) {
order = `(SELECT count(*) FROM posts_tags WHERE post_id = posts.id) DESC, ${order}`;
}
// CASE: if the filter contains an `IN` operator, we should return the posts first, which match both authors
if (options.filter && options.filter.match(/(authors|author):\s?\[.*\]/)) {
order = `(SELECT count(*) FROM posts_authors WHERE post_id = posts.id) DESC, ${order}`;
}
return order;
},
/**
* Returns an array of keys permitted in a method's `options` hash, depending on the current method.
* @param {String} methodName The name of the method to check valid options for.
* @return {Array} Keys allowed in the `options` hash of the model's method.
*/
permittedOptions: function permittedOptions(methodName) {
var options = ghostBookshelf.Model.permittedOptions.call(this, methodName),
// whitelists for the `options` hash argument on methods, by method name.
// these are the only options that can be passed to Bookshelf / Knex.
validOptions = {
findOne: ['columns', 'importing', 'withRelated', 'require', 'filter'],
findPage: ['status'],
findAll: ['columns', 'filter'],
destroy: ['destroyAll', 'destroyBy'],
edit: ['filter']
};
// The post model additionally supports having a formats option
options.push('formats');
if (validOptions[methodName]) {
options = options.concat(validOptions[methodName]);
}
return options;
},
/**
* We have to ensure consistency. If you listen on model events (e.g. `post.published`), you can expect that you always
* receive all fields including relations. Otherwise you can't rely on a consistent flow. And we want to avoid
* that event listeners have to re-fetch a resource. This function is used in the context of inserting
* and updating resources. We won't return the relations by default for now.
*
* We also always fetch posts metadata to keep current behavior consistent
*/
defaultRelations: function defaultRelations(methodName, options) {
if (['edit', 'add', 'destroy'].indexOf(methodName) !== -1) {
options.withRelated = _.union(['authors', 'tags'], options.withRelated || []);
}
options.withRelated = _.union(['posts_meta'], options.withRelated || []);
return options;
},
/**
* Manually add 'tags' attribute since it's not in the schema and call parent.
*
* @param {Object} data Has keys representing the model's attributes/fields in the database.
* @return {Object} The filtered results of the passed in data, containing only what's allowed in the schema.
*/
filterData: function filterData(data) {
var filteredData = ghostBookshelf.Model.filterData.apply(this, arguments),
extraData = _.pick(data, this.prototype.relationships);
_.merge(filteredData, extraData);
return filteredData;
},
// ## Model Data Functions
/**
* ### Find One
* @extends ghostBookshelf.Model.findOne to handle post status
* **See:** [ghostBookshelf.Model.findOne](base.js.html#Find%20One)
*/
findOne: function findOne(data = {}, options = {}) {
// @TODO: remove when we drop v0.1
if (!options.filter && !data.status) {
data.status = 'published';
}
if (data.status === 'all') {
delete data.status;
2013-06-01 18:47:41 +04:00
}
return ghostBookshelf.Model.findOne.call(this, data, options);
},
/**
* ### Edit
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
* Fetches and saves to Post. See model.Base.edit
* **See:** [ghostBookshelf.Model.edit](base.js.html#edit)
*/
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
edit: function edit(data, unfilteredOptions) {
let options = this.filterOptions(unfilteredOptions, 'edit', {extraAllowedProperties: ['id']});
const editPost = () => {
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
options.forUpdate = true;
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
return ghostBookshelf.Model.edit.call(this, data, options)
.then((post) => {
return this.findOne({
status: 'all',
id: options.id
}, _.merge({transacting: options.transacting}, unfilteredOptions))
.then((found) => {
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
if (found) {
// Pass along the updated attributes for checking status changes
found._previousAttributes = post._previousAttributes;
found._changed = post._changed;
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
return found;
}
});
});
};
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
if (!options.transacting) {
return ghostBookshelf.transaction((transacting) => {
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
options.transacting = transacting;
return editPost();
});
✨ post update collision detection (#8328) (#8362) closes #5599 If two users edit the same post, it can happen that they override each others content or post settings. With this change this won't happen anymore. ✨ Update collision for posts - add a new bookshelf plugin to detect these changes - use the `changed` object of bookshelf -> we don't have to create our own diff - compare client and server updated_at field - run editing posts in a transaction (see comments in code base) 🙀 update collision for tags - `updateTags` for adding posts on `onCreated` - happens after the post was inserted --> it's "okay" to attach the tags afterwards on insert --> there is no need to add collision for inserting data --> it's very hard to move the updateTags call to `onCreating`, because the `updateTags` function queries the database to look up the affected post - `updateTags` while editing posts on `onSaving` - all operations run in a transactions and are rolled back if something get's rejected - Post model edit: if we push a transaction from outside, take this one ✨ introduce options.forUpdate - if two queries happening in a transaction we have to signalise knex/mysql that we select for an update - otherwise the following case happens: >> you fetch posts for an update >> a user requests comes in and updates the post (e.g. sets title to "X") >> you update the fetched posts, title would get overriden to the old one use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: model listeners - use a transaction for listener updates - signalise forUpdate - write a complex test use options.forUpdate and protect internal post updates: scheduling - publish endpoint runs in a transaction - add complex test - @TODO: right now scheduling api uses posts api, therefor we had to extend the options for api's >> allowed to pass transactions through it >> but these are only allowed if defined from outside {opts: [...]} >> so i think this is fine and not dirty >> will wait for opinions >> alternatively we have to re-write the scheduling endpoint to use the models directly
2017-04-19 16:53:23 +03:00
}
return editPost();
},
/**
* ### Add
* @extends ghostBookshelf.Model.add to handle returning the full object
* **See:** [ghostBookshelf.Model.add](base.js.html#add)
*/
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
add: function add(data, unfilteredOptions) {
let options = this.filterOptions(unfilteredOptions, 'add', {extraAllowedProperties: ['id']});
const addPost = (() => {
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
return ghostBookshelf.Model.add.call(this, data, options)
.then((post) => {
return this.findOne({
status: 'all',
id: post.id
}, _.merge({transacting: options.transacting}, unfilteredOptions));
});
});
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
if (!options.transacting) {
return ghostBookshelf.transaction((transacting) => {
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
options.transacting = transacting;
return addPost();
});
}
return addPost();
},
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
destroy: function destroy(unfilteredOptions) {
let options = this.filterOptions(unfilteredOptions, 'destroy', {extraAllowedProperties: ['id']});
const destroyPost = () => {
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
return ghostBookshelf.Model.destroy.call(this, options);
};
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
if (!options.transacting) {
return ghostBookshelf.transaction((transacting) => {
Sorted out the mixed usages of `include` and `withRelated` (#9425) no issue - this commit cleans up the usages of `include` and `withRelated`. ### API layer (`include`) - as request parameter e.g. `?include=roles,tags` - as theme API parameter e.g. `{{get .... include="author"}}` - as internal API access e.g. `api.posts.browse({include: 'author,tags'})` - the `include` notation is more readable than `withRelated` - and it allows us to use a different easier format (comma separated list) - the API utility transforms these more readable properties into model style (or into Ghost style) ### Model access (`withRelated`) - e.g. `models.Post.findPage({withRelated: ['tags']})` - driven by bookshelf --- Commits explained. * Reorder the usage of `convertOptions` - 1. validation - 2. options convertion - 3. permissions - the reason is simple, the permission layer access the model layer - we have to prepare the options before talking to the model layer - added `convertOptions` where it was missed (not required, but for consistency reasons) * Use `withRelated` when accessing the model layer and use `include` when accessing the API layer * Change `convertOptions` API utiliy - API Usage - ghost.api(..., {include: 'tags,authors'}) - `include` should only be used when calling the API (either via request or via manual usage) - `include` is only for readability and easier format - Ghost (Model Layer Usage) - models.Post.findOne(..., {withRelated: ['tags', 'authors']}) - should only use `withRelated` - model layer cannot read 'tags,authors` - model layer has no idea what `include` means, speaks a different language - `withRelated` is bookshelf - internal usage * include-count plugin: use `withRelated` instead of `include` - imagine you outsource this plugin to git and publish it to npm - `include` is an unknown option in bookshelf * Updated `permittedOptions` in base model - `include` is no longer a known option * Remove all occurances of `include` in the model layer * Extend `filterOptions` base function - this function should be called as first action - we clone the unfiltered options - check if you are using `include` (this is a protection which could help us in the beginning) - check for permitted and (later on default `withRelated`) options - the usage is coming in next commit * Ensure we call `filterOptions` as first action - use `ghostBookshelf.Model.filterOptions` as first action - consistent naming pattern for incoming options: `unfilteredOptions` - re-added allowed options for `toJSON` - one unsolved architecture problem: - if you override a function e.g. `edit` - then you should call `filterOptions` as first action - the base implementation of e.g. `edit` will call it again - future improvement * Removed `findOne` from Invite model - no longer needed, the base implementation is the same
2018-02-15 12:53:53 +03:00
options.transacting = transacting;
return destroyPost();
});
}
return destroyPost();
},
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
// NOTE: the `authors` extension is the parent of the post model. It also has a permissible function.
permissible: function permissible(postModel, action, context, unsafeAttrs, loadedPermissions, hasUserPermission, hasAppPermission, hasApiKeyPermission) {
let isContributor;
let isOwner;
let isAdmin;
let isEditor;
let isIntegration;
let isEdit;
let isAdd;
let isDestroy;
function isChanging(attr) {
return unsafeAttrs[attr] && unsafeAttrs[attr] !== postModel.get(attr);
}
function isPublished() {
return unsafeAttrs.status && unsafeAttrs.status !== 'draft';
}
function isDraft() {
return postModel.get('status') === 'draft';
}
isContributor = loadedPermissions.user && _.some(loadedPermissions.user.roles, {name: 'Contributor'});
isOwner = loadedPermissions.user && _.some(loadedPermissions.user.roles, {name: 'Owner'});
isAdmin = loadedPermissions.user && _.some(loadedPermissions.user.roles, {name: 'Admin'});
isEditor = loadedPermissions.user && _.some(loadedPermissions.user.roles, {name: 'Editor'});
isIntegration = loadedPermissions.apiKey && _.some(loadedPermissions.apiKey.roles, {name: 'Admin Integration'});
isEdit = (action === 'edit');
isAdd = (action === 'add');
isDestroy = (action === 'destroy');
if (isContributor && isEdit) {
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
// Only allow contributor edit if status is changing, and the post is a draft post
hasUserPermission = !isChanging('status') && isDraft();
} else if (isContributor && isAdd) {
// If adding, make sure it's a draft post and has the correct ownership
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
hasUserPermission = !isPublished();
} else if (isContributor && isDestroy) {
// If destroying, only allow contributor to destroy their own draft posts
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
hasUserPermission = isDraft();
} else if (!(isOwner || isAdmin || isEditor || isIntegration)) {
hasUserPermission = !isChanging('visibility');
}
const excludedAttrs = [];
if (isContributor) {
// Note: at the moment primary_tag is a computed field,
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
// meaning we don't add it to this list. However, if the primary_tag/primary_author
// ever becomes a db field rather than a computed field, add it to this list
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
// TODO: once contributors are able to edit existing tags, this can be removed
// @TODO: we need a concept for making a diff between incoming tags and existing tags
excludedAttrs.push('tags');
}
if (hasUserPermission && hasApiKeyPermission && hasAppPermission) {
return Promise.resolve({excludedAttrs});
}
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
return Promise.reject(new common.errors.NoPermissionError({
message: common.i18n.t('errors.models.post.notEnoughPermission')
}));
}
});
2013-06-01 18:47:41 +04:00
Posts = ghostBookshelf.Collection.extend({
model: Post
});
2013-06-01 18:47:41 +04:00
✨ Multiple authors (#9426) no issue This PR adds the server side logic for multiple authors. This adds the ability to add multiple authors per post. We keep and support single authors (maybe till the next major - this is still in discussion) ### key notes - `authors` are not fetched by default, only if we need them - the migration script iterates over all posts and figures out if an author_id is valid and exists (in master we can add invalid author_id's) and then adds the relation (falls back to owner if invalid) - ~~i had to push a fork of bookshelf to npm because we currently can't bump bookshelf + the two bugs i discovered are anyway not yet merged (https://github.com/kirrg001/bookshelf/commits/master)~~ replaced by new bookshelf release - the implementation of single & multiple authors lives in a single place (introduction of a new concept: model relation) - if you destroy an author, we keep the behaviour for now -> remove all posts where the primary author id matches. furthermore, remove all relations in posts_authors (e.g. secondary author) - we make re-use of the `excludeAttrs` concept which was invented in the contributors PR (to protect editing authors as author/contributor role) -> i've added a clear todo that we need a logic to make a diff of the target relation -> both for tags and authors - `authors` helper available (same as `tags` helper) - `primary_author` computed field available - `primary_author` functionality available (same as `primary_tag` e.g. permalinks, prev/next helper etc)
2018-03-27 17:16:15 +03:00
// Extension for handling the logic for author + multiple authors
Post = relations.authors.extendModel(Post, Posts, ghostBookshelf);
module.exports = {
Post: ghostBookshelf.model('Post', Post),
Posts: ghostBookshelf.collection('Posts', Posts)
};