Aug 17 - Update customer inspector can update issue status

This commit is contained in:
2026-08-17 16:46:26 -04:00
parent 436ef5dafb
commit 607da7ae47
4 changed files with 72 additions and 7 deletions
+19
View File
@@ -295,6 +295,25 @@ let x = all.filter { ... }
---
### Role gates — `Constants.Roles` (Aug 2026)
**Never write `role == "inspector"` in a view.** `external_inspector` ("Customer Inspector" — an inspector employed by the customer) has the same powers as our own `inspector` and the API scopes it identically, so a literal equality check locks that account out of actions the server would happily accept. It fails **silently**: no error, no 403 to debug — the control simply is not drawn.
That is exactly what happened to Update Status, Handled By and Start Follow-up, which were three separate hand-written lists in two files:
| Site | Was | Now |
|---|---|---|
| `IssuesView.canUpdateStatus` | `admin \| director \| inspector` | `Constants.Roles.issueActors` |
| `IssuesView.canEditHandler` | `admin \| director \| inspector \| project_manager` | same |
| `InspectionHistoryView.canStartFollowUp` | `admin \| director \| inspector \| project_manager` | same |
`Constants.Roles` in `Utils/Constants.swift` is the single definition, mirroring `User.INSPECTOR_ROLES` / `User.is_inspector` on the server (server rule 87):
- `inspectorRoles` = `{inspector, external_inspector}` — test membership, never `==`.
- `issueActors` = `{admin, director, project_manager} inspectorRoles` — a **subset** of the API's `_ALLOWED_ROLES` for these endpoints, so every role it admits is one the server accepts. `auditor` is deliberately excluded (read-only in the app).
The server stays the authority and additionally enforces facility scope; these gates only decide whether to draw the control.
## 9. API Client (APIClient)
`actor APIClient` — singleton via `APIClient.shared`. All methods are `async throws`.
+40
View File
@@ -76,4 +76,44 @@ nonisolated enum Constants {
}
static let tokenRefreshBufferMinutes: Double = 5
// MARK: - Roles
//
// The server's role strings, and the ONE definition of which of them the
// app treats as an inspector. This mirrors `User.INSPECTOR_ROLES` /
// `User.is_inspector` in the Flask app (see server rule 87).
//
// Why this exists: `external_inspector` (displayed as "Customer Inspector"
// an inspector employed by the customer) has exactly the same powers as
// our own `inspector`, and the API scopes it identically. The views here
// were hand-written as `role == "admin" || role == "director" || role ==
// "inspector"`, so every one of them silently locked customer inspectors
// out of actions the SERVER was perfectly willing to accept Update
// Status, Handled By, Start Follow-up. The failure is invisible: no error,
// the control simply isn't drawn.
//
// Add a role in ONE place here; never re-write the literals in a view.
nonisolated enum Roles {
static let admin = "admin"
static let director = "director"
static let projectManager = "project_manager"
static let auditor = "auditor"
static let inspector = "inspector"
/// "Customer Inspector" employed by the customer, same powers as
/// `inspector`, scoped to their assigned contracts.
static let externalInspector = "external_inspector"
/// Both inspector roles. Test membership of this, never `== inspector`.
static let inspectorRoles: Set<String> = [inspector, externalInspector]
/// May change an issue's status / handler, and start a follow-up.
/// Matches what the API actually accepts for these actions; the server
/// remains the authority and additionally enforces facility scope.
static let issueActors: Set<String> =
[admin, director, projectManager].union(inspectorRoles)
static func isInspector(_ role: String) -> Bool {
inspectorRoles.contains(role)
}
}
}
@@ -290,10 +290,15 @@ struct IssueDetailView: View {
/// Inspector can update status only if the issue has synced (has a serverId)
/// and we are online. Admins/directors can always update when online.
///
/// Uses `Constants.Roles.issueActors` rather than a hand-written list: the
/// old `role == "inspector"` check silently excluded Customer Inspectors
/// (`external_inspector`), who the API has always accepted here the
/// Update Status control simply never appeared for them, with no error to
/// explain why.
private var canUpdateStatus: Bool {
guard sync.isOnline, issue.serverId != nil else { return false }
let role = AuthManager.shared.currentUserRole
return role == "admin" || role == "director" || role == "inspector"
return Constants.Roles.issueActors.contains(AuthManager.shared.currentUserRole)
}
private let allStatuses: [(value: String, label: String, color: Color)] = [
@@ -308,9 +313,7 @@ struct IssueDetailView: View {
/// admin/director/PM); the server enforces facility scope for inspectors.
private var canEditHandler: Bool {
guard sync.isOnline, issue.serverId != nil else { return false }
let role = AuthManager.shared.currentUserRole
return role == "admin" || role == "director"
|| role == "inspector" || role == "project_manager"
return Constants.Roles.issueActors.contains(AuthManager.shared.currentUserRole)
}
private func handlerTypeLabel(_ type: String) -> String {
@@ -371,9 +371,12 @@ struct HistoryDetailView: View {
/// Auditors are read-only everywhere else and the API rejects them (403),
/// so the two action buttons are hidden rather than shown failing.
///
/// `issueActors` is the same set minus auditor, and unlike the literal
/// list this replaced it includes Customer Inspectors, who perform
/// inspections exactly as our own do.
private var canStartFollowUp: Bool {
["admin", "director", "inspector", "project_manager"]
.contains(auth.currentUserRole)
Constants.Roles.issueActors.contains(auth.currentUserRole)
}
// Local SwiftData copy used only for follow-up sync-back.