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

Add groupname_template to change naming of Signal groups #23

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

LarsHaalck
Copy link

In order to distinguish Signal and Matrix rooms, I found it handy to append "(Signal)" as it is the default for display names in 1:1 chats. I only added another variable in config.yaml and changed the update_info()-function for Group and GroupV2 instances.

@tulir tulir self-requested a review January 16, 2021 00:44
@steadfasterX
Copy link

nice idea! I would appreciate having that :)

@maltee1
Copy link
Contributor

maltee1 commented Jun 22, 2022

Just in case this PR is still being considered, my 2 cents:
This will probably cause some undesirable behavior in a few scenarios that I can come up with:
When renaming the group on matrix, the existing "(Signal)" suffix will be sent to signal, which will on the next sync send a group name back with that suffix, which the bridge will turn into "(Signal) (Signal)".
Even worse when this is implemented on several bridges that support relaying room name changes and are used in the same room. It will cause a never-ending ping-pong of renaming the group - until the maximum group name length is reached, that is.
So this would have to be done a bit smarter, maybe the bridge should always scrap (Signal) from the group name before sending it to signal, no matter where in the name it reads it, or simply not add it when bridging the name from signal to matrix and (Signal) is already there. And it would probably have to be disabled if any non-logged-in users are in the room.

I think it's best avoided, because it's tricky to get right.

@LarsHaalck
Copy link
Author

Personally, I don't care about this PR anymore since I don't use the bridge due to multiple issues unrelated to this.

If someone is still interested, feel free to use this PR as a basis for any further changes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants