feat: activity support

[luka-nextcloud]

Resolves: #1897

[Koc]

can you please add import support 🙏? It can helps me a lot for #1801

[enjeck]

Not sure if this is intentional or not, but if you change a column name, the activity log that references the column still uses the old name which can be confusing

[luka-nextcloud]

Not sure if this is intentional or not, but if you change a column name, the activity log that references the column still uses the old name which can be confusing

@enjeck Since we use the activity log to track the object's history, I think we should respect the column name at the time the action was logged

[enjeck]

@enjeck Since we use the activity log to track the object's history, I think we should respect the column name at the time the action was logged

I agree!

[enjeck]

@luka-nextcloud Are you done here? Because from reading #1897, there are some requirements listed there and I wonder if we will be covering them all here

[luka-nextcloud]

@luka-nextcloud Are you done here? Because from reading #1897, there are some requirements listed there and I wonder if we will be covering them all here

@enjeck In my opinion, we are done for now. The remaining requirement is clean-up schedule (number 5 and 6) which I think should be discussed and done from the activity app.

[blizzz]

Great effort @luka-nextcloud 🙇 Everything looks good and works (two glitches, nothing big). Happy about this!

There are quick formal matters: please add declare(strict_types=1); to all new classes and add type hints and return types to the methods that do not have them (typically missing in some of the new classes).

And smaller functional cases:

• table deletion activity did not show up for me (owner of the table was someone else), but only for this someone else.
• Renaming a table, and Description update, have an issue with activity formatting or so: Rich subject or a parameter for "{user} has renamed the table {before} to {table}" is malformed

Backend-wise all is good. The frontend-usage is nice as well, I didn't check the code there though. If the items mentioned above can be addressed, green lights from my side.

[enjeck]

we can merge when the integration tests are fixed

[blizzz]

we can merge when the integration tests are fixed

they weren't broken actually, just some issue with the runners

[blizzz]

@enjeck please tell me my fixing and consolidating commit 16c9d87 is not utter nonsense. Tbh i am not sure that using rowHelper everywhere is clean from a where-i-pull-this-mixin-from point of view. And actually, can the mandatory attribute not be implemented directly in RowFormWrapper instead of everywhere?

[enjeck]

@enjeck please tell me my fixing and consolidating commit 16c9d87 is not utter nonsense. Tbh i am not sure that using rowHelper everywhere is clean from a where-i-pull-this-mixin-from point of view. And actually, can the mandatory attribute not be implemented directly in RowFormWrapper instead of everywhere?

Hmm, lemme check 👀

[blizzz]

Looks like it needs a fix for the view-mandatory-state tests

At least those tests pass now 🙂