-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 665
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
Peeking via MSC2753 #1370
Peeking via MSC2753 #1370
Conversation
doesn't yet compile or work. needs to actually add the peeking block into the sync response. checking in now before it gets any bigger, and to gather any initial feedback on the vague shape of it.
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.
Broadly speaking this implements MSC2753 well. There's some discussion to be had around the shape of peeking over federation, which will depend on what the federation API shape looks like.
To use: set `DENDRITE_TRACE_SQL=1` then grep for `unsafe`
assuming CI passes, i think this is ready to merge. |
Dendrite's implementing MSC2753 over at matrix-org/dendrite#1370 to prove the implementation for MSC purposes, and so sytest has sprouted tests for it over at matrix-org/sytest#944. But we don't want them to run on synapse until synapse implements it.
…ly altered sp when nothing is deleted
Co-authored-by: Kegan Dougal <kegan@matrix.org>
sytest is still failing for me locally on postgres with the peeked blocks having no timeline entries, so i am very confused on how this is passing CI. |
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.
Otherwise LGTM!
Dendrite's implementing MSC2753 over at matrix-org/dendrite#1370 to prove the implementation for MSC purposes, and so sytest has sprouted tests for it over at matrix-org/sytest#944. But we don't want them to run on synapse until synapse implements it.
This is a draft PR to gather feedback on the vague shape (and to help inform review of MSC2753), and to get something committed.
Full scope (although i'd like to merge this before it bitrots and handle the other checkboxes in other PRs):
peek
block into the sync response/unpeek
leave
blockSee also matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals#2753
This consciously doesn't implement peeking over federation, which should be a separate PR, but is the main reason for doing this.