Enabling / Disabling Features in a Laravel App - laravel

I'm building a Laravel app, which has a number of various features. I want to be able to enable or disable them depending on a particular domain's requirement. Currently, I have in my config a series of flags such as:
'is_feature_1_enabled' => true,
'is_feature_2_enabled' => false,
... and so on.
Then in my controllers and views, I check those config values to see whether or not I should be displaying something, allowing certain actions, etc. My app is starting to get polluted with these kinds of checks everywhere.
Is there a best practice method of managing features in a Laravel app?

This is technically called feature flags - https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html
depends on your requirements, flags in config/database, rollout, etc...
But it's basically if's in code and cannot be clean.
Laravel packages:
https://github.com/alfred-nutile-inc/laravel-feature-flag
https://github.com/francescomalatesta/laravel-feature
Some services:
https://launchdarkly.com/
https://bullet-train.io/
https://configcat.com/
Also look at https://marketingplatform.google.com/about/optimize/ for frontend.

I've encountered the same problem when I tried to implement multiple hotel providers.
What I did was using service container.
first you will create class for each domain With his features:
like Doman1.php ,Domain2.php
then inside each one of those you will add your logic.
then you gonna use binding in your app service provider to bind the domain with class to use.
$this->app->bind('Domain1',function (){
return new Domain1();
});
$this->app->bind('Domain2',function (){
return new Domain2();
});
Note you can use general class that holds the features goes with all domains then use that general class in your classes
Finally in your controller you can check your domain then to use the class you gonna use
app(url('/'))->methodName();

Look like you are hard coding things based on config values to enable or disable certain features. I recommend you to control things based on named routes rather than config value.
Group all the route as a whole or by feature wise.
Define name for all routes
Control the enable/disable activity by route name and record in database
Use Laravel middleware to check whether a particular feature is enabled or disabled by getting the current route name from request object and matching it with the database..
so you will not have the same conditions repeating every where and bloat your code..
here is a sample code show you how to retrieve all routes, and you can match the route group name to further process to match your situation.
Route::get('routes', function() {
$routeCollection = Route::getRoutes();
echo "<table >";
echo "<tr>";
echo "<td width='10%'><h4>HTTP Method</h4></td>";
echo "<td width='10%'><h4>Route</h4></td>";
echo "<td width='80%'><h4>Corresponding Action</h4></td>";
echo "</tr>";
foreach ($routeCollection as $value) {
echo "<tr>";
echo "<td>" . $value->getMethods()[0] . "</td>";
echo "<td>" . $value->getPath() . "</td>";
echo "<td>" . $value->getName() . "</td>";
echo "</tr>";
}
echo "</table>";
});
and here is a sample middleware handler where you can check whether a particular feature is active by matching with what you have already stored in your database..
public function handle($request, Closure $next)
{
if(Helper::isDisabled($request->route()->getName())){
abort(403,'This feature is disabled.');
}
return $next($request);
}

Assuming that those features are only needed for HTTP requests.
I would create a default Features base class with all the default flags:
Class Features {
// Defaults
protected $feature1_enabled = true;
protected $feature2_enabled = true;
public function isFeature1Enabled(): bool
{
return $this->feature1_enabled;
}
public function isFeature2Enabled(): bool
{
return $this->feature2_enabled;
}
}
Then I would extend that class for each Domain and set the overrides that are needed for that domain:
Class Domain1 extends Features {
// override
protected $feature1_enabled = false;
}
Then create a Middleware to bind the Features Class to the container:
class AssignFeatureByDomain
{
/**
* Handle an incoming request.
*
* #param \Illuminate\Http\Request $request
* #param \Closure $next
* #return mixed
*/
public function handle($request, Closure $next)
{
switch ($_SERVER['HTTP_HOST']) {
case 'domain1':
app()->bind(Features::class, Domain1::class);
break;
default:
abort(401, 'Domain rejected');
}
return $next($request);
}
}
Don't forget to attach this middleware to your routes: to a group or for each route.
After this you can TypeHint your Features class in your controllers:
public function index(Request $request, Features $features)
{
if ($features->isFeature1Enabled()) {
//
}
}

Laravel is great with this, you can even store your features in db, and create a relation between the domain.
I would recommend to use Gates and Policies, which will give you better control in your controllers and blade templates. This means you register the gates from your db or hard code them.
For example if you have export products feature with a button in your system and you want to make that feature available to some users you can register gates with business logic.
//Only admins can export products
Gate::define('export-products', function ($user) {
return $user->isAdmin;
});
Then you can do the following in the controllers
<?php
namespace App\Http\Controllers;
use App\Product;
use Illuminate\Http\Request;
use App\Http\Controllers\Controller;
class ProductsController extends Controller
{
/**
* Export products
*
* #param Request $request
* #param Post $post
* #return Response
* #throws \Illuminate\Auth\Access\AuthorizationException
*/
public function export(Request $request)
{
$this->authorize('export-products');
// The current user can export products
}
}
Here is an example for your blade templates:
#can('export-products', $post)
<!-- The Current User Can export products -->
#endcan
#cannot('export-products')
<!-- The Current User Can't export products -->
#endcannot
more information available at https://laravel.com/docs/5.8/authorization

Interesting case you have here. It might be interesting to look into a Feature interface or abstract class that contains a few methods you generally need.
interface Feature
{
public function isEnabled(): bool;
public function render(): string;
// Not entirely sure if this would be a best practice but the idea is to be
// able to call $feature->execute(...) on any feature.
public function execute(...);
...
}
You could even devide these into ExecutableFeature and RenderableFeature.
Further on some kind of factory class could be made to make life easier.
// Call class factory.
Feature::make('some_feature')->render();
...->isEnabled();
// Make helper method.
feature('some_feature')->render();
// Make a blade directives.
#feature('some_feature')
#featureEnabled('some_feature')

What I did in my case was creating a new table on the database, you could call it Domains for instance.
Add all the specific features, those which could be shown on some domains but not in the rest, as columns for that table as bit for boolean values. Like, in my case, allow_multiple_bookings, use_company_card... whatever.
Then, consider creating a class Domain and its respective repository, and just ask these values on your code, trying to push as much as possible that logic into your domain (your model, application services, etc).
For instance, I would not do the check on the controller method for RequestBooking if the domain which is requesting a booking can request only one or more.
Instead I do it on a RequestBookingValidatorService which can check if the booking datetime has passed, the user has an enabled credit card, ... or the Domain which this action comes from is allowed to request more than one booking (and then if it already has any).
This adds the convenience of readability, as you have pushed this decision to your application services. Also, I find that whenever I need a new feature I can use Laravel (or Symfony) migrations to add that feature on the table and I could even update its rows (your domains) with the values I want on the same commit I coded.

Related

Laravel installation in sub-folder and horizon not working

I have installed the Laravel in sub-folder and is trying to install the horizon. After routing to "test.com/sub-folder/horizon", all the design in broken and also the internal links are pointing to main domain instead of main-domain-without-subfolder.
After the search, it seems to be the known issue which is already reported in github issue
Has there is any work around to make horizon work when Laravel is installed in sub-folder?
I have a solution that only involves PHP.
The issue, as pointed out by #Isaiahiroko, is the basePath defined for Horizon's interface. That code is in Laravel\Horizon\Http\Controllers\HomeController::index(). The idea is this: we are going to pass to Laravel's service container our own implementation of that controller that will override the basePath definition passed to Horizon's interface.
Create a new controller with code like this:
<?php
namespace App\Http\Controllers;
use Illuminate\Contracts\Foundation\Application;
use Illuminate\Contracts\View\Factory;
use Illuminate\Http\Request;
use Illuminate\Support\Facades\App;
use Illuminate\Support\Str;
use Illuminate\View\View;
use Laravel\Horizon\Horizon;
use Laravel\Horizon\Http\Controllers\HomeController;
class HorizonHomeController extends HomeController
{
/**
* Overrides default horizon route to support subdirectory hosting.
*/
public function index ()
{
// We use a plain request to check for the base url.
$request = request();
// Set up our base path.
$base_path = Str::substr($request->getBasePath(), 1);
if (!empty($base_path)) {
$base_path .= '/';
}
// Patch default horizon variables with our own base path.
$variables = Horizon::scriptVariables();
$variables['path'] = $base_path . config('horizon.path');
// Render horizon's home view.
return view('horizon::layout', [
'assetsAreCurrent' => Horizon::assetsAreCurrent(),
'horizonScriptVariables' => $variables,
'cssFile' => Horizon::$useDarkTheme ? 'app-dark.css' : 'app.css',
'isDownForMaintenance' => App::isDownForMaintenance(),
]);
}
}
What's left is telling Laravel's service container that when Horizon's HomeController is requested, it should provide our HorizonHomeController class. In your AppServiceProvider, at the end of the register() method, set this up:
// [...]
class AppServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
// [...]
/**
* Register any application services.
*
* #return void
* #throws InvalidConfiguration
*/
public function register()
{
// [...]
// Horizon's subdirectory hack
$this->app->bind(
Laravel\Horizon\Http\Controllers\HomeController::class,
App\Http\Controllers\HorizonHomeController::class
);
}
// [...]
}
After that, you should be able to browse to http(s)://<your-host>/<your-sub-dir>/horizon normally.
Considerations:
To me this feels cleaner that patching a compiled js, which also has the downside that needs to be re-applied every time Horizon is updated (this can be mitigated with a post-update script in composer, tho). Also, for additional points, this solution is only overriding the method that renders the view, but not the route, which means all of Horizon's authentication mechanisms (middlewares and gates) are working exactly as described in the documentation.
If you desperately need to do this, here is a hack:
In public\vendor\horizon\app.js, search for window.Horizon.basePath
replace window.Horizon.basePath="/"+window.Horizon.path; with window.Horizon.basePath="/[you sub-directoy]/"+window.Horizon.path;
It should work...until you run update one day and it mysteriously stop working.

Routing & pretty URL

I am looking to create prettier URLs, and I'm having issues creating a valid route:
Let's say I have the following page http://localhost/app/account/5/edit.
This works fine with Route::get('account/{account}', 'AccountController#edit');
If I modify the Account Model and modify getRouteKeyName to return 'name', I am able to (with the same Route from above) access the following link: http://localhost/app/account/randomName/edit
The thing is, I am interested in a slightly different route, which is: http://localhost/app/account/randomName-5/edit
If I create a route Route::get('/accounts/{ignore}-{account}/edit', 'AccountController#edit'), it will fail as the first argument sent to edit is string and not an instance of Account. This can easily be fixed by modifying edit(Account $ac) to edit($ignored, Account $ac);... but it feels like cheating.
Is there a way to to get the route to ignore the first {block}?
According to the docs, you can customize your resolution logic for route model binding.
In this scenario, you can do something like this in App\Providers\RouteServiceProvider:
/**
* Bootstrap any application services.
*
* #return void
*/
public function boot()
{
parent::boot();
Route::bind('accountNameWithId', function ($value) {
list($accountName, $accountId) = explode('-', $value);
return App\Account::whereKey($accountId)
->where('name', $accountName)
->firstOrFail();
});
}
Then you can redefine your route like this:
Route::get('account/{accountNameWithId}', 'AccountController#edit');

Laravel Nova - Save multiple rows to database on create

I'm converting a Laravel app that was using Backpack across to Laravel Nova.
One of my models Images allows the user to add multiple images with a base set of information from the initial form. The form in this instance asks how many images are in the series via a dropdown and then has a number of relevant fields that will be used for all of the new images being added. When saving, in the controller, I'm using the following eloquent feature to run a number of tasks and insert the required number of rows:
public function store(StoreRequest $request){
//Get some info
//Make some tweaks
//Use for loop to save multiple records
for ($k = 0; $k < $addim; $k++){
//Do some stuff
parent::storeCrud(${"request"});
}
}
This works perfectly and inserts however many records are required.
In Laravel Nova, I can't see a way to use this same approach. Using an event listener in the model doesn't seem like the right way to save multiple records and I can't find any reference to a controller function I can use to achieve this.
I would really appreciate some thoughts and guidance on the best way to complete this part.
If someone has stumbled upon this type of problem.
You can use Laravel Observers.
In order to restrict the event to be fired only when resource is created and only using nova you can declare Observer in NovaServiceProvider.php as follows
/**
* Bootstrap any application services.
*
* #return void
*/
public function boot()
{
parent::boot();
Nova::serving(function () {
Image::observe(ImageObserver::class);
});
}
Above code will only be triggered when your image object is modified using nova system only.
For ref Observer code will look like following
<?php
namespace App\Observers;
use App\Models\Document;
class ImageObserver
{
/**
* Handle the Image "created" event.
*
* #param \App\Models\Image $image
* #return void
*/
public function created(Image $image)
{
//logic to create multiple records
}
}
You can use the saving event in an observable
https://laravel.com/docs/5.8/eloquent#events

How can I change SMTP details globally at runtime?

I'm using Laravel 5.5. The nature of the website is a 'multisite' architecture where multiple websites/domains are run from the same codebase.
I've come across an issue when sending email. I need to change the from name and address as well as the transport (SMTP, etc) options depending on which website is being viewed. I have these details stored in a config file.
The easiest way is to just pull those details in the Controller before I call Mail::send/Mail::queue and to update them. However, this brings back 2 issues:
There is a heavy reliance on remembering to actually do that every time I send any email in the code. In short, it's not abiding by DRY.
I'd be forced to use Mail::send instead of Mail::queue, because the queue wouldn't have any idea of the config update from the time it was queued only from when it is processed .
How can I achieve what I am looking to do here in a clean way?
I thought about extending all of my 'Mailable' classes with a custom class that updates the SMTP details, but it doesn't look like you can update the SMTP/Transport information after the class is initiated; you can only update the from name and address.
I managed to find a way to do this.
I had my mailable class (ContactFormMailable) extend a custom class, as follows:
<?php
namespace CustomGlobal\Mail;
use CustomGlobal\Mail\CustomMailable;
use CustomGlobal\ContactForm;
class ContactFormMailable extends CustomMailable
{
public $contact_form;
/**
* Create a new message instance.
*
* #return void
*/
public function __construct(ContactForm $contact_form)
{
$this->contact_form = $contact_form;
}
/**
* Build the message.
*
* #return $this
*/
public function build()
{
$view = $this->get_custom_mail_view('contact_form', $this->contact_form);
return $this->subject('Contact Form Enquiry')
->view($view);
}
}
You'll notice I'm calling get_custom_mail_view. This is in my extended class and used to calculate the view and template I need to use for my mail, depending on the website being viewed. In here I also set the location of my config folder.
<?php
namespace CustomGlobal\Mail;
use Illuminate\Bus\Queueable;
use Illuminate\Mail\Mailable;
use Illuminate\Contracts\Mail\Mailer;
use Illuminate\Queue\SerializesModels;
use Illuminate\Contracts\Queue\ShouldQueue;
use Swift_Mailer;
use Swift_SmtpTransport;
use CustomGlobal\Website;
use CustomGlobal\Territory;
class CustomMailable extends Mailable
{
use Queueable, SerializesModels;
public $layout_view_to_serve;
public $host_folder;
/**
* Override Mailable functionality to support per-user mail settings
*
* #param \Illuminate\Contracts\Mail\Mailer $mailer
* #return void
*/
public function send(Mailer $mailer)
{
app()->call([$this, 'build']);
$config = config($this->host_folder .'.mail');
// Set SMTP details for this host
$host = $config['host'];
$port = $config['port'];
$encryption = $config['encryption'];
$transport = new Swift_SmtpTransport( $host, $port, $encryption );
$transport->setUsername($config['username']);
$transport->setPassword($config['password']);
$mailer->setSwiftMailer(new Swift_Mailer($transport));
$mailer->send($this->buildView(), $this->buildViewData(), function ($message) use($config) {
$message->from([$config['from']['address'] => $config['from']['name']]);
$this->buildFrom($message)
->buildRecipients($message)
->buildSubject($message)
->buildAttachments($message)
->runCallbacks($message);
});
}
/**
* Calculate the template we need to serve.
* $entity can be any object but it must contain a
* $website_id and $territory_id, as that is used
* to calculate the path.
*/
public function get_custom_mail_view($view_filename, $entity)
{
if(empty($view_filename)) {
throw new Exception('The get_custom_mail_view method requires a view to be passed as parameter 1.');
}
if(empty($entity->website_id) || empty($entity->territory_id)) {
throw new Exception('The get_custom_mail_view method must be passed an object containing a website_id and territory_id value.');
}
// Get the website and territory
$website = Website::findOrFail($entity->website_id);
$territory = Territory::findOrFail($entity->territory_id);
$view_to_serve = false;
$layout_view_to_serve = false;
// Be sure to replace . with _, as Laravel doesn't play nice with dots in folder names
$host_folder = str_replace('.', '_', $website->website_domain);
$this->host_folder = $host_folder; // Used for mail config later
/***
Truncated for readability. What's in this area isn't really important to this answer.
***/
$this->layout_view_to_serve = $layout_view_to_serve;
return $view_to_serve;
}
}
It's important to remember that mail can be queued. If you do this is another way, such as setting a config at runtime, then you'll find that the process that runs the queue has no visibility/scope of your runtime config changes, and you'll end up firing out email from your default values.
I found a few answers similar to this one, which helped me out, but none of them worked completely, and some are out-dated (Swift_SmtpTransport is changed considerably since those answers).
Hopefully this helps someone else out.

Best way of passing response information from Model to Controller using Laravel

The Model View Controller architecture tells me that all my business logic should be inside the Model, while the data flow should be handled by the Controller.
Knowing this, while I'm dealing with my logic inside the Model, I need to let the Controller know if he's supposed to redirect to another url, redirect back, what kind of message or variable to pass during the redirection, etc.
What is the best way of doing this?
I can think of some ways, like throwing exceptions on the Modeland catching them on the Controller or returning an array from the Model and treating it on the Controller, but none of them seem very nice. The easiest way would be calling the Redirect->to() (or back()) inside the Model and just returning the Model's return on the Controller, but it seem to break the architecture's separation of rules.
Is there a "right" way of doing this? What would be the pros and cons of each way?
EDIT:
The answer below is old. Laravel now includes a bunch of different ways of handling common problems.
For example, use Laravel's FormRequest's as a way of validating data easily on controller methods, and Jobs to handle business logic for creating / updating models.
OLD POST:
This is a common question, and while the 'MVC' pattern is nice for a basic starting point for a web app, I feel like the majority of developers always need another intermediate service for validation, data handling, and other problems that come up during development.
To answer your question without bias: There is no right way.
To answer your question with my own personal bias, I feel the majority of developers will use the Repositories or Services pattern to handle intermediate data handling between the controller and the model, and also have separate classes for validation as well.
In my opinion, Repositories are better for a framework and data agnostic design (due their interface driven implementation), and Services are better for handling the business logic / rules. Controllers are better used for handling responses and for passing the input data to the repository or the service.
The paths for each of these patterns are the same though:
Request -> Controller (Validation) -> Service -> Model -> Database
Request -> Controller (Validation) -> RepositoryInterface -> Model -> Database
Validation is in brackets since input isn't passed from the validator to the service / repository, the input sent to the validator, gives the 'OK', and let's the controller know it's ok to send the data to the Service / Repository to be processed.
I only use Services when I'm absolutely positive I won't be changing frameworks or data sources. Otherwise I'll use Repositories. Repositories are just a little more work to setup, since you'll need to make Laravel resolve the interface to your repository class through its IoC.
Services Example:
The Service:
namespace App\Services;
use App\Models\Post;
class PostService
{
/**
* #var Post
*/
protected $model;
/**
* Constructor.
*
* #param Post $post
*/
public function __construct(Post $post)
{
$this->model = $post;
}
/**
* Creates a new post.
*
* #param array $input
*/
public function create(array $input)
{
// Perform business rules on data
$post = $this->model->create($input);
if($post) return $post;
return false;
}
}
The Controller:
namespace App\Http\Controllers;
use App\Services\PostService;
use App\Validators\PostValidaor;
class PostController extends Controller
{
/**
* #var PostService
*/
protected $postService;
/**
* #var PostValidator
*/
protected $postValidator;
/**
* Constructor.
*
* #param PostService $postService
* #param PostValidator $postValidator
*/
public function __construct(PostService $postService, PostValidator $post Validator)
{
$this->postService = $postService;
$this->postValidator = $postValidator;
}
/**
* Processes creating a new post.
*/
public function store()
{
$input = Input::all();
if($this->postValidator->passes($input)) {
// Validation passed, lets send off the data to the service
$post = $this->postService->create($input);
if($post) {
return 'A post was successfully created!';
} else {
return 'Uh oh, looks like there was an issue creating a post.';
}
} else {
// Validation failed, return the errors
return $this->postValidator->errors();
}
}
}
Now with this pattern, you have a nice separation of all your processes, and a clear indication of what each of them do.
For a repository example, Google 'Laravel Repository Pattern'. There are tons of articles about this.
Actually - in Laravel 5 that is not the best way to do it. Business logic should not be in models. The only thing that models should do is retrieve and store data from your database.
You are better off using the CommandBus or ServiceProviders to handle application logic and business rules. There are many articles on the web about these, but personally I prefer laracasts.com as the best learning resource.

Resources