fix: generate png thumbnail previews for svg files

[abhinavkrin]

Proposed changes (including videos or screenshots)

Fixed an issue where SVG thumbnails were incorrectly handled as PNGs, causing preview errors. Now, the system correctly identifies and presents the generated PNG thumbnails, allowing for proper SVG image previews.

Issue(s)

Steps to test or reproduce

Outline the steps to test or reproduce the PR here.

1. Go to File Upload > Blocked Media Types, leave the field blank.
2. Upload any .svg image file.
3. The SVG image should now preview correctly without reverting to a retry screen.

Further comments

SUP-495

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: fec0686

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 31 packages

Name	Type
@rocket.chat/meteor	Patch
@rocket.chat/core-typings	Patch
@rocket.chat/rest-typings	Patch
@rocket.chat/apps	Patch
@rocket.chat/core-services	Patch
@rocket.chat/cron	Patch
@rocket.chat/gazzodown	Patch
@rocket.chat/livechat	Patch
@rocket.chat/model-typings	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-contexts	Patch
@rocket.chat/account-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/authorization-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/ddp-streamer	Patch
@rocket.chat/omnichannel-transcript	Patch
@rocket.chat/presence-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/queue-worker	Patch
@rocket.chat/stream-hub-service	Patch
@rocket.chat/api-client	Patch
@rocket.chat/license	Patch
@rocket.chat/omnichannel-services	Patch
@rocket.chat/pdf-worker	Patch
@rocket.chat/presence	Patch
rocketchat-services	Patch
@rocket.chat/ddp-client	Patch
@rocket.chat/fuselage-ui-kit	Patch
@rocket.chat/models	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-client	Patch
@rocket.chat/ui-video-conf	Patch
@rocket.chat/uikit-playground	Patch
@rocket.chat/web-ui-registration	Patch
@rocket.chat/instance-status	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 54.50%. Comparing base (44721d7) to head (fec0686).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop   #31883   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    54.50%   54.50%           
========================================
  Files         2294     2294           
  Lines        50562    50562           
  Branches     10325    10325           
========================================
  Hits         27561    27561           
  Misses       20501    20501           
  Partials      2500     2500           

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	53.50% <ø> (ø)
e2e-api	40.15% <ø> (ø)
unit	75.45% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

[MarcosSpessatto]

We could add a test case to cover this. We can get the message and see if there is one of the files with the desired extension.

[debdutdeb]

Also, I'm seeing a lot of ||s ..not all just from this pr, but at what point we should just deny the process instead of adding fallback?

for example, what are the chances of a file getting uploaded without a filename, shouldn't we fail the action if there is no name? Then wouldn't have to fallback onto an empty string there.

[abhinavkrin]

Also, I'm seeing a lot of ||s ..not all just from this pr, but at what point we should just deny the process instead of adding fallback?

for example, what are the chances of a file getting uploaded without a filename, shouldn't we fail the action if there is no name? Then wouldn't have to fallback onto an empty string there.

It seems we cannot upload a file without a name. So, I can remove the fallback

[debdutdeb]

code lgtm. didn't test it. 👍