This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 11, 2024. It is now read-only.
-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 831
Feeds event with relation to unknown to the widget #12283
Merged
dbkr
merged 3 commits into
matrix-org:develop
from
nordeck:nic/feat/feed_event_with_relation_unknown
Feb 29, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this seems reasonable, although maybe we should default to sending the event on if we can't find either the event or the receipt, rather than special-casing events whose parent we can't find? (ie. rename
isBeforeMark
toshouldForward
or something, set it to true to start with and set it to false in the first clause rather than the second... and comment it, obviously).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have changed
isBeforeMark
toshouldForward
that makes easier to understand this logic, but I can’t follow on the suggestion to change:It not looks clear to me how event or the receipt find could resolve the same issue. Could you please explain more exactly what you mean with that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dbkr could you please have a look on the changes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, I was just suggesting that, since the problem here is that we can't prove that the event is after the read marker because we can't find the event, we could also just default to forwarding if we can't prove the event hasn't been read, which I think would probably be safe enough. That said, this is a smaller change, so it seems fine.