Inviting unregistered users by email

[klakhov]

Motivation and context

How has this been tested?

Checklist

• I submit my changes into the develop branch
• I have added a description of my changes into the CHANGELOG file
• I have updated the documentation accordingly
• I have added tests to cover my changes
• I have linked related issues (see GitHub docs)
• I have increased versions of npm packages if it is necessary
  (cvat-canvas,
  cvat-core,
  cvat-data and
  cvat-ui)

License

• I submit my code changes under the same MIT License that covers the project.
  Feel free to contact the maintainers if that's a concern.

[klakhov]

@bsekachev

Is it possible to redirect to login or default tasks page if invitation already accepted? Because now I can open this form many times:

As we discussed on HLD meeting, We shouldn't do initial request to check invitation status, because after form is filled invitation can become invalid(expired, deleted etc...). But it would be nice feature for the future.

After a regular registration user gets authenticated immediately after registration. Here it suggest me to login after. Why is it different?

Maybe we should add it. But currently we consider this form as changing user account info (Like change password, as user account is already created. In password changing logic we redirect user to login form after successful change.)

Probably it is true, but I am asking just in case. If a user was invited by email, after registration the user's email gets verified without additional actions?

Yes, thats true

Maybe we should discuss with somebody, but I believe light blue on orange button is not really contrast: It is unpleasant to look at the button.

Changed it to white:

[bsekachev]

@klakhov

As we discussed on HLD meeting, We shouldn't do initial request to check invitation status, because after form is filled invitation can become invalid(exired, deleted etc...). But it would be nice feature for the future.

If discussed on HLD, ok.
But IMHO user should now if invitation was expired before filling the form, otherwise UX is worse.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #6901 (5b59af8) into develop (e699848) will decrease coverage by 0.21%.
Report is 12 commits behind head on develop.
The diff coverage is 44.93%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #6901      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    82.58%   82.37%   -0.21%     
===========================================
  Files          360      361       +1     
  Lines        38914    39115     +201     
  Branches      3570     3579       +9     
===========================================
+ Hits         32137    32221      +84     
- Misses        6777     6894     +117     

Components	Coverage Δ
cvat-ui	77.40% <42.97%> (-0.21%)	⬇️
cvat-server	86.93% <47.16%> (-0.21%)	⬇️

[SpecLad]

I was thinking more along the lines of leaving this field as it is, and adding a new field with the BasicInvitation type.

BTW I dont think this field was used in any way, because all the previous invitations were auto accepted.

Even if it wasn't used by the UI, it was still exposed. In particular, the SDK will attempt to parse all fields in a response, even if you don't use some of them, so this change will break it.

[nmanovic]

Please let me play a littile bit with the PR. Probably, I have some questions.