* add tests for responsive layout
* test: Create E2E tests to check the responsive design for a regular booking and edit a regular event type
* test: Create E2E tests to check the responsive design for a regular booking and edit a regular event type
* test: Create E2E tests to check the responsive design for a regular booking and edit a regular event type
* Create tests
* Create tests
* Create tests
* add changes
---------
Co-authored-by: gitstart-calcom <gitstart-calcom@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: GitStart-Cal.com <121884634+gitstart-calcom@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Keith Williams <keithwillcode@gmail.com>
* feat: make org members list private
* fix: add isOrg to MakeTeamPrivateSwitch in other-team-members-view
---------
Co-authored-by: supalarry <lauris.skraucis@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Peer Richelsen <peeroke@gmail.com>
* fixed some of the terms language
* minor changes
* Update apps/web/pages/settings/organizations/[id]/onboard-admins.tsx
* fixed yarn
* nit
* fix: trans
---------
Co-authored-by: Udit Takkar <udit222001@gmail.com>
## What does this PR do?
- This PR migrates the `/auth/sso/*` page group to the app directory (which runs under the App Router).
- The migrated page exists under `/future/auth/sso/*` and is accessible at all times.
## Requirement/Documentation
- If there is a requirement document, please, share it here.
- If there is ab UI/UX design document, please, share it here.
## Type of change
- [x] Chore (refactoring code, technical debt, workflow improvements)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How should this be tested?
There should be no changes between the old sso and new sso routes in terms of content and no downgrading in terms of performance.
The pages were not tested due to being unable to reproduce the flow locally.
## Mandatory Tasks
- [x] Make sure you have self-reviewed the code. A decent size PR without self-review might be rejected.
## What does this PR do?
- This PR migrates the `/auth/logout` and `/auth/signin` pages to the app directory (which runs under the App Router).
- Using `/future/auth/logout` is available at all times and is supposed to log the user out as `/auth/logout` page does.
- However `signin` page (or fragment) was used before should behave the same using the `/future/auth/signin` route.
## Requirement/Documentation
- If there is a requirement document, please, share it here.
- If there is ab UI/UX design document, please, share it here.
## Type of change
- [x] Chore (refactoring code, technical debt, workflow improvements)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How should this be tested?
- Using `/future/auth/logout` is available at all times and is supposed to log the user out as `/auth/logout` page does.
- However `signin` page (or fragment) was used before should behave the same using the `/future/auth/signin` route. It was not tested locally.
## Mandatory Tasks
- [x] Make sure you have self-reviewed the code. A decent size PR without self-review might be rejected.
## What does this PR do?
- This PR migrates the `/auth/verify` and `/auth/verify-email` pages to the app directory (which runs under the App Router).
- The migrated pages exist under `/future/auth/verify` and `/future/auth/verify-email` and are accessible at all times.
## Requirement/Documentation
- If there is a requirement document, please, share it here.
- If there is ab UI/UX design document, please, share it here.
## Type of change
- [x] Chore (refactoring code, technical debt, workflow improvements)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## How should this be tested?
There should be no changes between the old verify and new verify routes in terms of content and no downgrading in terms of performance.
The pages were not tested due to being unable to reproduce the flow locally.
## Mandatory Tasks
- [x] Make sure you have self-reviewed the code. A decent size PR without self-review might be rejected.
Crowdin Bot