Add Custom Data to Web User Invite #35124
Conversation
- Manually add a prefix to custom data fields for consistency with the `CustomDataEditor` form since all fields for that form have the prefix applied. This is will later be relevant for populating post data for disabled fields
When a field is disabled, it is not included in the form post data. This manually adds the field data back in
dimagimon
added
Risk: High
Jtang-1
force-pushed
the
jt/add-custom-data-web-user-invite
branch
from
58d6529
to
e0fc01e
Compare
Jtang-1
requested review from
a team,
MartinRiese,
minhaminha and
Robert-Costello
and removed request for
a team
corehq/toggles/__init__.py
Outdated
| @@ -2528,6 +2528,13 @@ def _commtrackify(domain_name, toggle_is_enabled): | |||
| namespaces=[NAMESPACE_DOMAIN] | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
| WEB_USER_INVITE_ADDITIONAL_FIELDS = StaticToggle( | |||
| 'web_user_invite_additional_fields', | |||
| 'Enable additional fields in web user invite form for enhanced user details', | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this have a "USH:" in front or is the automatically GAed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes it should 63273ea
corehq/apps/users/models.py
Outdated
| if assigned_location_ids is None: | ||
| assigned_location_ids = [] | ||
| if custom_user_data is None: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this needed? It seems like the check on line 572 would take care of this and I don's see custom_user_data used anywhere else.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you're right, that's not needed. 8405864
| self.request = kwargs.get('request') | ||
| super(AdminInvitesUserForm, self).__init__(domain=domain, data=data, **kwargs) | ||
| self.can_edit_tableau_config = can_edit_tableau_config | ||
| domain_obj = Domain.get_by_name(domain) | ||
| self.fields['role'].choices = [('', _("Select a role"))] + role_choices | ||
| if domain_obj: | ||
| if domain_has_privilege(domain_obj.name, privileges.APP_USER_PROFILES): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Might be missing something but why is this FF not being used anymore? Is it effectively putting all this behind the new flag?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if domain_has_privilege(domain_obj.name, privileges.APP_USER_PROFILES) and profile: | ||
| user_data = self.get_user_data(domain_obj.name) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This does still require the domain privilege check for profiles and I believe it does do the check. Or maybe i'm misunderstanding your comment
… needs to be manually removed for conditional check
… the prefix within the name as defined by the user
Product Description
Allows the user to define "user data" when creating a web user invite.
Technical Summary
Editing custom user data uses the
CustomDataEditorclass which generates the profile and user data fields forCustomDataForm. The need here is very similar from the form UI side. However, it does not require populating existing user data.In order to reuse the
CustomDataForm, I initialized an instance ofCustomDataEditorwhich initializes the form. Then this instance ofCustomDataEditoris injected intoAdminInvitesUserForm. The fields and fieldsets created as part ofCustomDataFormis then pulled out to create the field and fieldsets forAdminInvitesUserForm. One issue faced is thatCustomDataFormapplies a form level defined prefix for each field but this prefix is applied only upon rendering the form. But since we are not using that form directly and are only extracting the fields, adding the prefix needs to be manually handled inAdminInvitesUserForm.Additionally, when a user data field is defined and populated by the profile, the field is disabled. Because of this, posted data will not include data for this field.
CustomDataFormalready handles that and adds profile related fields to the post data.AdminInvitesUserFormtakes advantage of that by accessing post data viaself.custom_data.form.data.Feature Flag
New feature flag:
WEB_USER_INVITE_ADDITIONAL_FIELDSSafety Assurance
Safety story
Locally tested and both backend and frontend changes are gated behind a FF which limits the blast radius.
Automated test coverage
No automated test
QA Plan
QA-7109
Rollback instructions
Labels & Review