Solves #16015
- Added a check in `useTimelineActivities.ts` to see if the system
object page we're viewing has timelineActivity being tracked before
querying to get the activity history.
- Removed @WorkspaceIsObjectUIReadOnly decorator from system objects and
added @WorkspaceIsFieldUIReadOnly to standard and system fields to allow
custom field edits as requested in the issue.
- Did not add calendarEvents or other system objects to timelineActivity
just yet since keeping track of timeline activity for every one of them
felt counter-intuitive and bloated. In order to determine which objects
need timelineActivity, I think we need to fix the broken views of system
objects first, such as the one in the attached screenshots - a good
number of them are broken. The check I added to
`useTimelineActivities.ts` hook displays timeline activity as empty for
the time - error would not be shown as suggested by Thomas.
<img width="1062" height="858" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e877e0fe-b665-46e3-b785-e84f2af7f833"
/>
<br />
<img width="1061" height="858" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0eba8c1c-444a-4b13-beda-64b95cf39077"
/>
- Editing custom fields on calendar events (and other objects without
position fields) crashed with TypeError: Cannot convert undefined or
null to object in sortCachedObjectEdges. This happened because some
cached queries had empty orderBy arrays ([]), and the optimistic effect
tried to sort with them. Objects without position fields returned
empty orderBy arrays when there were no sorts, while objects with
position fields automatically got [{ position: 'AscNullsFirst' }].
The backend always adds { id: 'AscNullsFirst' } as a fallback, but
the frontend didn't match this. So, I added { id: 'AscNullsFirst' } to
the Frontend as default orderBy when there are no sorts and no position
field.
<!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---
> [!NOTE]
> Apply per-field UI read-only to system/standard fields and skip
timeline activity fetching when the target object isn’t related; refine
record-table cell open/navigation behavior.
>
> - Server: Replace object-level UI read-only with per-field
`isUIReadOnly` across many standard objects (e.g., `calendarEvent`,
`workspaceMember`, messaging, calendar, favorites, attachments,
workflows, etc.), and mirror this via `@WorkspaceIsFieldUIReadOnly` on
workspace entities.
> - Frontend: In `useTimelineActivities.ts`, check object metadata for a
relation to `timelineActivity` and `skip` the query when absent,
preventing errors on system object pages.
> - Frontend: Simplify/adjust record-table cell logic—remove unused
args, allow navigation from first column when non-empty, block editing
for read-only records (while still allowing navigation), and update
button handlers/hover styles accordingly.
>
> <sup>Written by [Cursor
Bugbot](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot) for commit
dac1262d70d97ce84b39730454dd3579c494994a. This will update automatically
on new commits. Configure
[here](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot).</sup>
<!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Félix Malfait <felix@twenty.com>
# Introduction
related to https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/1833
In this PR we're starting the sync-metadata and standardIds deprecation
by introducing `twenty-standard` application that will regroup every
standard object such as company and opportunities. But also the
`custom-workspace-application` which is an app created at the same time
as a workspace and that will regroup everything configure within the
workspace ( custom objects fields etc )
## What's done
On both new workspace and seeded workspace creation:
- Creating a custom workspace app
- Creating a twenty standard app
- Refactored the seed core schema and workspace creation to be run
within a transaction in order to handle circular dependency foreignkey
requirements ( which is deferred for app toward workspace )
- Updated workspace entity to have a custom workspace relation (
nullable for the moment until we implem an upgrade command to handle
retro comp )
- Integration testing on user, workspace creation deletion and expected
default apps creation
- ~~Soft deleted user on `deleteUser`~~ Done by marie and rebased on it
## What's next
- Update seeder to propagate the `twenty-standard` workspace
`applicationId` to every standard synchronized entities ( cheap and fast
iteration through the about to be deprecated sync-metadata as an easy
way to synchronize standards metadata entities ).
- Update seeder to propagate the `custom-workspace-application`
workspace `applicationId` to anything custom ( `pets` and `rockets` )
- Prepend `custom-workspace-application` `applicationId` to every
metadata API operations ( create a specific cache etc )
- Upgrade command on all existing workspace to create a custom app and
associate its applicationId to any existing custom entities
- Make `universalIdentifier` and `applicationId` required for any
syncable entity
As title
- adds decorators in twenty-sdk
- update twenty-cli load-manifest to it gets @FieldMetadata infos +
testing
- update twenty-server so it CRUD fields properly, using
universalIdentifier
- Fix UI so we can update managed objects records
- move FieldMetadata items from twenty-server to twenty-shared
## Context
Following this https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/4199
This has not been fully implemented, after 5months of dead code I'm
removing the feature for the time being until we re-prioritise the
feature (unlikely during these next 6 months) to keep the codebase a bit
cleaner (no need to maintain dead features)
Feel free to reopen / revert this PR once feature is ready
## Test
locally after importing emails
## Context
ObjectMetadataService became quite large and handles too many
responsibilities. I'm trying to refactor a bit this part in preparation
of a larger work that will combine object-metadata services and
sync-metadata logic
- Created a STANDARD_OBJECT_ICONS that can be reused in relation
creation to refer to a standard object icon.
- Created a STANDARD_OBJECT_FIELD_IDS that can be used with an object
name to get its standard field ids.
- Moved migration, record and relation creations to dedicated services,
refactored to improve performances and readability
- Refactored some validation logic
---------
Co-authored-by: Charles Bochet <charles@twenty.com>
- Remove `messageThreadId` from `messageChannelMessageAssociation`
- Update thread merging
- Update all queries which were dependent on this field
- Update some raw queries by using `twentyORM` instead
---------
Co-authored-by: Weiko <corentin@twenty.com>
# Feature: Email thread members visibility
For this feature we implemented a chip and a dropdown menu that allows
users to check which workspace members can see an email thread, as
depicted on issue (#4199).
## Implementations
- create a new database table (messageThreadMember)
- relations between `messageThreadMembers` and the relevant existing
tables (`MessageThread` and `WorkspaceMembers`)
- added a new column to the `MessageThread table`: `everyone` - to
indicate that all workspace members can see the email thread
- create a new repository for the new table, including new queries
- edit the queries so that the new fields could be fetched from the
frontend
- created a component `MultiChip`, that shows a group of user avatars,
instead of just one
- created a component, `ShareDropdownMenu`, that shows up once the
`EmailThreadMembersChip` is clicked. On this menu you can see which
workspace members can view the email thread.
## Screenshots
Here are some screenshots of the frontend components that were created:
Chip with everyone in the workspace being part of the message thread:
Chip with just one member of the workspace (the owner) being part of the
message thread:
Chip with some members of the workspace being part of the message
thread:
How the chip looks in a message thread:
Dropdown that opens when you click on the chip:
## Testing and Mock data
We also added mock data (TypeORM seeds), focusing on adding mock data
related to message thread members.
## Conclusion
As some of the changes that we needed to do, regarding the change of
visibility of the message thread, were not covered by the existing
documentation, we were told to open a PR and ask for feedback on this
part of the implementation. Right now, our implementation is focused on
displaying who is part of an email thread.
Feel free to let us know which steps we should follow next :)
---------
Co-authored-by: Simão Sanguinho <simao.sanguinho@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
Co-authored-by: Lucas Bordeau <bordeau.lucas@gmail.com>
In this PR, I'm refactoring the messaging module into smaller pieces
that have **ONE** responsibility: import messages, clean messages,
handle message participant creation, instead of having ~30 modules (1
per service, jobs, cron, ...). This is mandatory to start introducing
drivers (gmails, office365, ...) IMO. It is too difficult to enforce
common interfaces as we have too many interfaces (30 modules...). All
modules should not be exposed
Right now, we have services that are almost functions:
do-that-and-this.service.ts / do-that-and-this.module.ts
I believe we should have something more organized at a high level and it
does not matter that much if we have a bit of code duplicates.
Note that the proposal is not fully implemented in the current PR that
has only focused on messaging folder (biggest part)
Here is the high level proposal:
- connected-account: token-refresher
- blocklist
- messaging: message-importer, message-cleaner, message-participants,
... (right now I'm keeping a big messaging-common but this will
disappear see below)
- calendar: calendar-importer, calendar-cleaner, ...
Consequences:
1) It's OK to re-implement several times some things. Example:
- error handling in connected-account, messaging, and calendar instead
of trying to unify. They are actually different error handling. The only
things that might be in common is the GmailError => CommonError parsing
and I'm not even sure it makes a lot of sense as these 3 apis might have
different format actually
- auto-creation. Calendar and Messaging could actually have different
rules
2) **We should not have circular dependencies:**
- I believe this was the reason why we had so many modules, to be able
to cherry pick the one we wanted to avoid circular deps. This is not the
right approach IMO, we need architect the whole messaging by defining
high level blocks that won't have circular dependencies by design. If we
encounter one, we should rethink and break the block in a way that makes
sense.
- ex: connected-account.resolver is not in the same module as
token-refresher. ==> connected-account.resolver => message-importer (as
we trigger full sync job when we connect an account) => token-refresher
(as we refresh token on message import).
connected-account.resolver and token-refresher both in connected-account
folder but should be in different modules. Otherwise it's a circular
dependency. It does not mean that we should create 1 module per service
as it was done before
In a nutshell: The code needs to be thought in term of reponsibilities
and in a way that enforce high level interfaces (and avoid circular
dependencies)
Bonus: As you can see, this code is also removing a lot of code because
of the removal of many .module.ts (also because I'm removing the sync
scripts v2 feature flag end removing old code)
Bonus: I have prefixed services name with Messaging to improve dev xp.
GmailErrorHandler could be different between MessagingGmailErrorHandler
and CalendarGmailErrorHandler for instance
Abdullah.