Added conversation_status, assignee_id, team_id, and priority to the
message_created event to allow users to build automations based on
conversation details. Also introduced a new open_conversation action.
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Linear Link
https://linear.app/chatwoot/issue/CW-4480/expose-custom-attributes-in-conversation-to-captain-so-that-it-can
## Description
Expose custom attributes in conversation to Captain so that it can
provide more information
## Type of change
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Checklist:
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
Added support for Telegram Business bots. Telegram webhooks from such bots include the business_message field, which we transform into a standard message for Chatwoot. This PR also modifies how we handle replies, attachments, and image uploads when working with Telegram Business bots.
demo: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Yz82wXBVRtb-mxjXogkUju4hlJbt3qyh/view?usp=sharing&t=4Fixes#10181
This PR adds support for handling Telegram's video_note messages (circular video messages), which are commonly used for short voice-style video replies in messaging.
Fixes: #11503
Co-authored-by: Sojan Jose <sojan@pepalo.com>
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Added input_select message type support for LINE
## Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [X] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality not to work as expected)
- [ ] This change requires a documentation update
## How Has This Been Tested?
add testcase. and test manually by myself
## Checklist:
- [X] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [X] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
…on (#11584)"
This reverts commit b5ebc47637.
# Pull Request Template
## Description
Please include a summary of the change and issue(s) fixed. Also, mention
relevant motivation, context, and any dependencies that this change
requires.
Fixes # (issue)
## Type of change
Please delete options that are not relevant.
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality not to work as expected)
- [ ] This change requires a documentation update
## How Has This Been Tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide
instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details
for your test configuration.
## Checklist:
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [ ] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
Fixes https://github.com/chatwoot/chatwoot/issues/11569
## Problem
On platforms like WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger, customers cannot
reply to messages after 24 hours (or other channel-specific messaging
windows). Despite this limitation, the system continued sending CSAT
surveys to customers outside their messaging window, making it
impossible for them to respond.
## Solution
Added a check for `conversation.can_reply?` in the
`should_send_csat_survey?` method. This leverages the existing
`MessageWindowService` which already handles all channel-specific
messaging window logic.
- Automate the deletion of accounts that have requested deletion via
account settings.
- Add a Sidekiq job that runs daily to find accounts that have requested
deletion and have passed the 7-day window.
- This job deletes the account and then soft-deletes users if they do
not belong to any other account.
- This job also sends an email to the Chatwoot instance admin for
compliance purposes.
- The Chatwoot instance admin's email is configurable via the
`CHATWOOT_INSTANCE_ADMIN_EMAIL` global config.
---------
Co-authored-by: Sojan Jose <sojan@pepalo.com>
A while back, we added a UX enhancement that disabled sending the OOO
message when an agent had replied to the conversation in the last 5
minutes.
https://github.com/chatwoot/chatwoot/pull/11073
This would not send a "we will be back" message even if that reply was a
private note. This would break for bots that posted private notes, and
even for agents who need to just add a note and not actually reply to
the email.
# Pull Request Template
## Description
This PR addresses an issue where users were unable to view images sent
via WhatsApp on Chatwoot due to incorrect Twilio authentication
configuration.
https://app.chatwoot.com/app/accounts/1/conversations/50824
The problem stemmed from how authentication was being handled for Twilio
API requests. The user had configured their inbox using api_key_sid, but
the backend logic used only auth_token, leading to failed
authentication. Further investigation showed that some customers might
input api_secret into the auth_token field unintentionally.
## Type of change
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality not to work as expected)
- [ ] This change requires a documentation update
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Tested on console with Client(api_key_sid, auth_token, account_sid)
and validated successful authentication for the customer (Twilio channel
ID: 2702).
- Simulated toggling the “Use API Key Authentication” checkbox to ensure
backend behavior matches UI intent
- Verified image rendering by testing with the same image URL that was
previously failing for the user.
## Checklist:
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my code
- [x] I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream
modules
---------
Co-authored-by: Muhsin Keloth <muhsinkeramam@gmail.com>
Tanmay Deep Sharma