Support updating existing channels for Facebook and Instagram, remove… #5692
Conversation
norkans7
force-pushed
the
refresh-token-meta-channels
branch
from
0b795f3
to
6538fa3
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5692 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 573 573
Lines 25798 25735 -63
=========================================
- Hits 25798 25735 -63 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ class Category(Enum): | |||
| beta_only = False | |||
|
|
|||
| unique_addresses = False | |||
| matching_addresses_updates = False | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To allow update the existing channel with matching address
| ), | ||
| ] | ||
| menu_items = [ | ||
| dict(label=_("Reconnect Facebook Page"), view_name="channels.types.facebookapp.claim", obj_view=False) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This keep the link to reconnect on the channel page menu instead of trying to use add new channel that could be confusing to users
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added obj_view as we are linking to a view that will not take the obj uuid as parameter
| error_connect = False | ||
| if resp.status_code != 200: | ||
| error_connect = True | ||
| existing_channel = Channel.objects.filter( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We first check for an existing channel and update it.
If none found we create a new one
|
So this changes claiming a channel so that it can update an existing channel if the address is the same? I'm not sure that's the most intuitive workflow. I was thinking that we could 1) show that a channel is broken 2) allow reconnecting it. And generally allow updating credentials on existing channels instead of treating them like immutable objects. Isn't that possible in the FB/IG case? |
|
On the Facebook app we need to add URLs that are allowed to receive the token from the Facebook login wizard, we can only use the claim URL for now, so that is why I use the approach to use the same view. |
|
Instead of the refresh token view we had that used to check the channel credentials is valid, We can have CheckValid view that will do the same but to reconnect the user will need to use the same claim view as adding a new channel I do not think we want to always use the token on the read page to check the token is valid, |
|
We already have |
|
|
norkans7
force-pushed
the
refresh-token-meta-channels
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ace1e1a
to
b1d5402
Compare
… old refresh token views
norkans7
force-pushed
the
refresh-token-meta-channels
branch
from
b1d5402
to
e3d5174
Compare
| @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ | |||
| {% extends "smartmin/read.html" %} | |||
| {% load smartmin temba humanize channels i18n tz %} | |||
norkans7
force-pushed
the
refresh-token-meta-channels
branch
from
e3d5174
to
7ae8ba7
Compare
| {% blocktrans trimmed with name=branding.name %} | ||
| You can connect your Facebook page to {{ name }} in just a few simple steps. | ||
| {% endblocktrans %} | ||
| {% if update_existing %} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clarification when the user gets to the page from reconnecting an existing channel
norkans7
force-pushed
the
refresh-token-meta-channels
branch
from
0c0dfde
to
e37fbd3
Compare
… old refresh token views