Skip to content

Conversation

steverydz
Copy link
Contributor

@steverydz steverydz commented Oct 20, 2025

Done

Amends the text for verified domains so verified publishers don't show the disclaimer which non-verified publishers have.

How to QA

  • Go to https://snapcraft-io-5426.demos.haus/gimp
  • Hover over the icon next to the ownership verified domain under "Websites" and check that the tooltip says: "The publisher has verified that they own this domain"
  • Go to https://snapcraft-io-5426.demos.haus/steve-test-snap
  • Hover over the icon next to the ownership verified domain under "Websites" and check that the tooltip says: "The publisher has verified that they own this domain. It does not guarantee the Snap is an official upload from the upstream project."

Testing

  • This PR has tests
  • No testing required (explain why): No behavioural changes

Issue / Card

Fixes https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/WD-30124

@Copilot Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 20, 2025 12:16
@webteam-app
Copy link

@steverydz steverydz changed the title chore: Update text on verified domain tooltip to account for verified… chore: Update text on verified domain tooltip to account for verified publisher Oct 20, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR updates the tooltip text for verified domain indicators to differentiate between verified domains and verified publishers. When a publisher is verified (not just their domain), a simpler message is shown without the upstream project disclaimer.

Key changes:

  • Adds conditional rendering based on developer_validation status
  • Shows a simplified tooltip message for verified publishers
  • Retains the more detailed disclaimer for domain-only verification

@steverydz steverydz force-pushed the WD-30124-remove-verified-disclaimer-when-publisher-is-verified branch from a7627a4 to 30019b7 Compare October 20, 2025 12:35
<span class="p-tooltip__message" role="tooltip" id="verified-explanation">The publisher has verified that they own this domain</span>
{% else %}
<span class="p-tooltip__message" role="tooltip" id="verified-explanation">The publisher has verified that they own this domain.
It does not guarantee the Snap is an official upload
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With just this sentence being the difference, would it work to just wrap just this sentence in "if publisher is not verified" (instead of whole tooltip being difference inside if/else statement?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@bartaz I did try that, but with the text inside a tooltip being pre it messed up the spacing and indentation and looked broken

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, true.

I guess you could try doing {%- if … -%}…{%- endif -%} as dashes prevent Jinja from rendering empty lines in place of its commands, but it may still we fragile in pre.

Copy link
Member

@bartaz bartaz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, with an option to try if jinja still messes up formatting if {%- … -%} are used.

@steverydz steverydz force-pushed the WD-30124-remove-verified-disclaimer-when-publisher-is-verified branch from 30019b7 to fa8d87e Compare October 20, 2025 14:35
@steverydz steverydz merged commit 8eccfb6 into main Oct 20, 2025
13 checks passed
@steverydz steverydz deleted the WD-30124-remove-verified-disclaimer-when-publisher-is-verified branch October 20, 2025 14:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants