[1.7] Allow Review UIs to decide whether they're usable on a case-by-case basis.

Review Request #6007 — Created June 17, 2014 and submitted

chipx86
Review Board
release-1.7.x
ade64f4...
reviewboard

ReviewUI subclaseses can now define a is_enabled_for() function, which
returns whether it can be enabled for the given user, review request,
and/or file attachment. This allows, for instance, limiting a review UI
based on extra_data on an object, or based on the given user or
Local Site, or anything else.

Tested this with a file attachment returning True, and then returning False.

Implemented a custom version and tested by file attachment name.

Description From Last Updated

Same question here about kwargs vs args.

daviddavid

Does it require using kwargs for these? The variable names seem pretty self explanatory (is_enabled_for(request.user, review_request. file_attachment))

daviddavid
reviewbot
  1. Tool: Pyflakes
    Processed Files:
        reviewboard/reviews/views.py
        reviewboard/reviews/ui/base.py
        reviewboard/reviews/templatetags/reviewtags.py
    
    Ignored Files:
        reviewboard/templates/reviews/review_request_box.html
    
    
    
    Tool: PEP8 Style Checker
    Processed Files:
        reviewboard/reviews/views.py
        reviewboard/reviews/ui/base.py
        reviewboard/reviews/templatetags/reviewtags.py
    
    Ignored Files:
        reviewboard/templates/reviews/review_request_box.html
    
    
  2. 
      
david
  1. 
      
  2. reviewboard/reviews/templatetags/reviewtags.py (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     

    Same question here about kwargs vs args.

  3. reviewboard/reviews/views.py (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     

    Does it require using kwargs for these? The variable names seem pretty self explanatory (is_enabled_for(request.user, review_request. file_attachment))

    1. I wanted to basically allow this to be somewhat expansive for the future, and to allow implementations to just define:

      def is_enabled_for(self, file_attachment, **kwargs):
          ...
      

      Most won't need all the objects, so it didn't seem worth them all listing all of them in the right order.

    2. In that case, I think that ReviewUI.is_enabled_for() should list them as kwargs (using =None) and probably mention your subclass intent.

  4. 
      
chipx86
reviewbot
  1. Tool: Pyflakes
    Processed Files:
        reviewboard/reviews/views.py
        reviewboard/reviews/ui/base.py
        reviewboard/reviews/templatetags/reviewtags.py
    
    Ignored Files:
        reviewboard/templates/reviews/review_request_box.html
    
    
    
    Tool: PEP8 Style Checker
    Processed Files:
        reviewboard/reviews/views.py
        reviewboard/reviews/ui/base.py
        reviewboard/reviews/templatetags/reviewtags.py
    
    Ignored Files:
        reviewboard/templates/reviews/review_request_box.html
    
    
  2. 
      
david
  1. Ship It!

  2. 
      
chipx86
chipx86
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Change Summary:

Pushed to release-2.0.x (ba025c7)
chipx86
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Change Summary:

Pushed to master (ba025c7)
Loading...