handle quote tweet-style mentions #582
Conversation
original post discovery needs to run recursively on attachments (if the attachment belongs to our user) to find the original URL for the attachment ref snarfed#504
|
this is deployed on https://bridgy-kwm.appspot.com here's a backfed quote tweet: https://bridgy-kwm.appspot.com/log?start_time=1450912031&key=agxzfmJyaWRneS1rd21yNQsSCFJlc3BvbnNlIid0YWc6dHdpdHRlci5jb20sMjAxMzo2Nzk3OTU4NDM1MTIxNzY2NDEM |
|
uhm, but it also backfed a response to tantek for his own tweet :/ EDIT: ok for better or for worse this is the existing behavior, not a regression. here is the same tweet backfed from bridgy proper a week ago: |
|
yup, whee. afaik that's one of the edge case casualties of the post-#51 OPD new world order. for many of them (like that one), i think we didn't even agree amongst ourselves what the right behavior was. so to confirm, that's entirely unrelated to this PR? |
|
Yep, unrelated! I was worried it might be a regression at first but it wasn't On December 23, 2015 3:33:33 PM PST, Ryan Barrett notifications@github.com wrote:
|
| 'original post discovery on attachment found originals=%s, mentions=%s', | ||
| att_origs, att_mentions) | ||
| mentions.update(att_origs) | ||
| mentions.update(att_mentions) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we do this? i'm not sure. even with salmentions, if A mentions B, and B mentions C, that doesn't mean A transitively mentions C, does it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you're right, I'll remove that line
|
you were right! this definitely seems straightforward. thanks for doing it! |
|
oh also, corresponds to snarfed/granary#69, just for the record. |
|
oh, and updating the "what gets sent back" section in the docs! always a fun last step, at least for me. |
original post discovery needs to run recursively on attachments (if
the attachment belongs to our user) to find the original URL for the
attachment
ref #504