FriendsOfFlarum Byōbu, well integrated, advanced private discussions

Pollux

I have another issue that doesn't seem to be specific to Byobu, but @luceos might have an explanation.

I am trying to exclude private discussions from the 'discussions' tab on the profile page (e.g. /u/Pollux/discussions).

In Beta 13 I could limit my results by adding -is:private to the api query, e.g. /api/discussions?filter[q]=author:Pollux%20-is:private. In Beta 14 the same query gives me only the private discussions, the minus sign is ignored.

Is this on purpose? And if yes, is there a new way to exclude private discussions from the results?

luceos

Pollux the unified index option is part of the user settings. And default the private discussions do not show on the index.

Pollux

luceos the unified index option is part of the user settings. And default the private discussions do not show on the index.

I know. But this setting doesn't affect the inclusion of private discussions within the profile page. Furthermore I want
the result set in the profile page to be independent from the unified index setting; private discussions shall always be excluded from the 'discussions' tab and be shown exclusively in a to be created 'private discussions' tab.

I just ask myself if the described difference between Beta 13 and Beta 14 regarding the gambit:

is:private vs. -is:private

... is on purpose. In Beta 13 the first one delivers the complementary result set to the second whereas in Beta 14 both show the same results, just the private discussions. The minus sign is ignored.

In comparison author:Pollux and -author:Pollux work as intended and identically in Beta 13 and Beta 14.

luceos

Pollux I know. But this setting doesn't affect the inclusion of private discussions within the profile page. Furthermore I want
the result set in the profile page to be independent from the unified index setting; private discussions shall always be excluded from the 'discussions' tab and be shown exclusively in a to be created 'private discussions' tab.

I wasn't aware that was happening, that sounds like a bug.

Pollux I just ask myself if the described difference between Beta 13 and Beta 14 regarding the gambit:

is:private vs. -is:private

... is on purpose. In Beta 13 the first one delivers the complementary result set to the second whereas in Beta 14 both show the same results, just the private discussions. The minus sign is ignored.

That gambit is part of byobu not core and yes I touched pretty much all the code that was contained in byobu because it was big mess. I'm afraid new bugs might have arisen. I'll look at fixing those when I have time.

Pollux

luceos That gambit is part of byobu not core and yes I touched pretty much all the code that was contained in byobu because it was big mess. I'm afraid new bugs might have arisen. I'll look at fixing those when I have time.

This sounds great.

Being able to negate the is:private gambit would put this one in line with the core gambits, which seems a desirable goal to me.

neko

idk if this is helpful at all, i'm new to flarum (and laravel in general) and don't know enough about how byobu functions to fix it, but the permissions issue with the tags seems to stem from the approveIfPrivate function in the discussion policy. not returning anything seems to fix the bug.

also i think it's unrelated but in the isPrivate function in the screener, it returns users twice instead of either users or groups.

bryantmilan

neko I think this is probably related to the issue where all replies require approval, but if you have a reply that's awaiting approval, the topic shows up in the list of private discussions.

I just tested this issue and you are right! It's the same with me. And in all previous versions of Byobu there were problems with the Approval extension, it seems that these two extensions are in conflict and don't like each other 😆

[deleted]

Seeing this after opening a new "Discuss Privately" window, then closing it, and trying to open again

Uncaught (in promise) TypeError: Cannot read property 'toArray' of undefined
    at e.n.data (PrivateDiscussionComposer.js:29)
    at t.app.initializers.add.et.a.changed (index.js:40)
    at t.<anonymous> (index.js:186)
    at t.<computed> [as preventExit] (extend.js:61)
    at t.e.load (ComposerState.js:53)
    at t.<computed> [as load] (extend.js:25)
    at PrivateComposing.js:25
    at new Promise (<anonymous>)
    at t.o.action (PrivateComposing.js:15)
    at _.handleEvent (render.js:888)
2PrivateDiscussionComposer.js:29 Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'toArray' of undefined
    at e.n.data (PrivateDiscussionComposer.js:29)
    at t.app.initializers.add.et.a.changed (index.js:40)
    at index.js:169
2PrivateDiscussionComposer.js:29 Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'toArray' of undefined
    at e.n.data (PrivateDiscussionComposer.js:29)
    at t.app.initializers.add.et.a.changed (index.js:40)
    at index.js:169
n.data @ PrivateDiscussionComposer.js:29
app.initializers.add.et.a.changed @ index.js:40
(anonymous) @ index.js:169

Any ideas ?

Thanks

peopleinside

Hi, on https://extiverse.com/?filter%5Bq%5D=byobu&sort=-created_at&filter%5Bis%5D%5B%5D=-flarum&filter%5Btype%5D= I see FoF Byōbu is compatible with Beta 14.1 but when I activate it forum stop to work.
Is only me?

For me FoF Byōbu seems not to be compatible.

clarkwinkelmann

peopleinside only the beta version is compatible with beta 14. See luceos for how to install

peopleinside

clarkwinkelmann so in extiverse should be not showed yet as compatible, I think 😃

clarkwinkelmann

peopleinside blame @luceos 😛 I suppose the latest version is used for Extiverse, regardless of the stability level.

luceos

peopleinside beta and up are marked as compatible, because some people tag (especially language) extensions based on the Flarum versioning. Alphas and dev versions are not compatible. Once flarum core leaves beta I guess that will change as well.

luceos

Has anyone running the 0.6 beta met any issues? Otherwise I'll be tagging a stable 0.6 soon.

neko

luceos Has anyone running the 0.6 beta met any issues? Otherwise I'll be tagging a stable 0.6 soon.

what do you mean? there's been a few bug reports in this thread o.o

see these about an issue with permissions that makes it so that while byobu is active, every reply to every topic requires approval for everyone:
https://discuss.flarum.org/d/4762-friendsofflarum-by-bu-well-integrated-advanced-private-discussions/743
https://discuss.flarum.org/d/4762-friendsofflarum-by-bu-well-integrated-advanced-private-discussions/746 (not sure why this says it's posted by a deleted user, i'm still here!)
https://discuss.flarum.org/d/4762-friendsofflarum-by-bu-well-integrated-advanced-private-discussions/752
https://discuss.flarum.org/d/4762-friendsofflarum-by-bu-well-integrated-advanced-private-discussions/753

i was unable to replicate this one:
https://discuss.flarum.org/d/4762-friendsofflarum-by-bu-well-integrated-advanced-private-discussions/754

sylv38

cmwetherell I have the same issue, did you find a solution ?

luceos

cmwetherell

sylv38

If this is still an issue please post the output of php flarum info and screencapture your Byobu related permissions please.

sylv38

luceos Wow, quick answer, thanks !
Here are required screen captures (sorry, permissions are in french)

sylv38

luceos Maybe it can help you : note that users are correctly found and listed in flarum general search box. In byobu, the popup with "users" title appears while typing a name, but users are not listed below.

cmwetherell

@luceos Here is an example picture. This is the first four letters of a user on my forum. It doesn't work for any user except admin.

If it would be useful, feel free to make an account at https://averageactuary.com/discussion-forum/ and try to PM< me, username is CalebWetherell

MartinJD

cmwetherell I'm also seeing this issue.

« Previous Page Next Page »