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 β€œSign 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

feat(chat): Add the mention id to parameters for easier editing #14270

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2025

Conversation

nickvergessen
Copy link
Member

@nickvergessen nickvergessen commented Jan 31, 2025 β€’

πŸ› οΈ API Checklist

🚧 Tasks

  • ...

🏁 Checklist

  • ⛑️ Tests (unit and/or integration) are included or not possible
  • πŸ“˜ API documentation in docs/ has been updated or is not required
  • πŸ”– Capability is added or not needed

Sorry, something went wrong.

@SystemKeeper
Copy link
Contributor

Is there any reason to not always wrap a mention in quotes? Currently we only do it if there's a "/" or whitespace, but does it really matter?

@nickvergessen
Copy link
Member Author

Is there any reason to not always wrap a mention in quotes? Currently we only do it if there's a "/" or whitespace, but does it really matter?

IIRC it works always so its save to do it always, but e.g. on our instance since we use "first name", I always type it directly manually without waiting for the autocomplete

@nickvergessen nickvergessen force-pushed the feat/noid/expose-mention-id branch from a2f2504 to ee0074e Compare February 5, 2025 14:04
@nickvergessen nickvergessen added this to the πŸͺΊ Next Major (32) milestone Feb 5, 2025
@nickvergessen
Copy link
Member Author

/backport to stable31

@nickvergessen nickvergessen self-assigned this Feb 5, 2025
@nickvergessen nickvergessen added 3. to review enhancement feature: chat πŸ’¬ Chat and system messages feature: api πŸ› οΈ OCS API for conversations, chats and participants and removed backport-request labels Feb 5, 2025
@nickvergessen
Copy link
Member Author

when proxying such a message I guess the server should extend the attribute if it was missing?

@SystemKeeper
Copy link
Contributor

when proxying such a message I guess the server should extend the attribute if it was missing?

Would be nice, if it’s not too much work. Then it consistent across all clients.

@nickvergessen
Copy link
Member Author

Can't add it to OpenAPI docs as the type then conflicts with the RichObject Definitions and Psalm complains

@nickvergessen
Copy link
Member Author

/backport to stable31

@nickvergessen nickvergessen force-pushed the feat/noid/expose-mention-id branch 2 times, most recently from 7a93818 to 8fba13f Compare February 7, 2025 15:17

Verified

This commit was signed with the committer’s verified signature.
nickvergessen Joas Schilling
Signed-off-by: Joas Schilling <[email protected]>
@nickvergessen nickvergessen force-pushed the feat/noid/expose-mention-id branch from 8fba13f to a2ed72a Compare February 7, 2025 15:32
@nickvergessen nickvergessen merged commit 8ba4488 into main Feb 7, 2025
78 checks passed
@nickvergessen nickvergessen deleted the feat/noid/expose-mention-id branch February 7, 2025 15:45
@SystemKeeper
Copy link
Contributor

Can we backport to stable30 and stable29 as well, since we introduced message editing with 19/29? This would allow for more consistent editing and testing.

@SystemKeeper
Copy link
Contributor

/backport to stable30

@SystemKeeper
Copy link
Contributor

/backport to stable29

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3. to review enhancement feature: api πŸ› οΈ OCS API for conversations, chats and participants feature: chat πŸ’¬ Chat and system messages
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants