Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Topic command expects that bot needs to be a channel operator #1842

Closed
Petteri opened this issue Apr 12, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1981
Closed

Topic command expects that bot needs to be a channel operator #1842

Petteri opened this issue Apr 12, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1981
Labels
Bug Things to squish; generally used for issues Low Priority
Milestone

Comments

@Petteri
Copy link

Petteri commented Apr 12, 2020

Description

Topic command expects that bot needs to be channel operator, even when the channel does not have +t mode set.

Reproduction steps

join a channel where +t is not set

<petteri> .topic test
<bot> petteri: I'm not a channel operator!
-- Mode #test [+o bot] by petteri
<petteri> .topic test
-- bot has changed topic for #test from "test" to "Welcome to: #test | Topic: test"

Expected behavior

bot should be able to set the topic on a channel without +t even when it is not a channel operator

Environment

  • Sopel .version: [c705f45]
  • Sopel installed via: [source]
  • Python version: [3.7.4]
  • Operating system: [Ubuntu 19.04]
  • IRCd /version: [oragono v2.0.0]
@Petteri Petteri added the Bug Things to squish; generally used for issues label Apr 12, 2020
@dgw dgw added this to the 7.1.0 milestone Apr 12, 2020
@dgw
Copy link
Member

dgw commented Apr 12, 2020

Rewriting our MODE tracking would be good to do for 7.1, now that we parse and expose ISUPPORT data. This would require adding real mode-tracking for channels, though; currently Sopel only pays attention to channel privileges.

Disclaimer: This could get bumped to a later release depending on how long it takes to design the interface for plugins to access channels' MODE info.

@dgw
Copy link
Member

dgw commented Oct 18, 2020

@Exirel Does this fruit seem low-hanging enough to get done for 7.1 yet, or do you wanna punt it?

half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2020
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2020
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2020
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Jan 11, 2021
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Jan 12, 2021
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Jan 12, 2021
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Jan 23, 2021
half-duplex added a commit to half-duplex/sopel that referenced this issue Jan 23, 2021
@dgw dgw closed this as completed in #1981 Jan 23, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug Things to squish; generally used for issues Low Priority
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants