Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upuser blocking of domains #501
Conversation
deckycoss
added some commits
Jan 19, 2017
| @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ def unblock | ||
| def relationships | ||
| ids = params[:id].is_a?(Enumerable) ? params[:id].map(&:to_i) : [params[:id].to_i] | ||
| - @accounts = Account.where(id: ids).select('id') | ||
| + @accounts = Account.where(id: ids).select('id, domain') |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
deckycoss
Jan 19, 2017
i think i was testing something that i didn't quite understand from @hach-que 's closed patch, and forgot to revert it
deckycoss
Jan 19, 2017
i think i was testing something that i didn't quite understand from @hach-que 's closed patch, and forgot to revert it
| + @current_account = current_account | ||
| + end | ||
| + | ||
| + def blocked |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Gargron
Jan 22, 2017
Member
If it returns a boolean, the convention is to end the method name with ?
Gargron
Jan 22, 2017
Member
If it returns a boolean, the convention is to end the method name with ?
deckycoss
added some commits
Jan 25, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
deckycoss
commented
Jan 26, 2017
|
@Gargron see my last few messages on masto |
deckycoss
added some commits
Jan 26, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
deckycoss
Jan 28, 2017
@Gargron i think i finally managed to merge from upstream without breaking anything. this patch is done until i receive any feedback suggesting otherwise.
by the way, i never figured out why the tests originally passed "blocking?" an array, since whenever i do this the result is always false, even if the array matches the set of accounts that are being blocked. i was able to make the test failures go away by adding return false unless other_account.is_a?(Account) to my "blocking_account_or_domain?" method, thus preventing arrays from being used at all, but that felt like a weird solution so i haven't pushed it yet.
deckycoss
commented
Jan 28, 2017
|
@Gargron i think i finally managed to merge from upstream without breaking anything. this patch is done until i receive any feedback suggesting otherwise. by the way, i never figured out why the tests originally passed "blocking?" an array, since whenever i do this the result is always false, even if the array matches the set of accounts that are being blocked. i was able to make the test failures go away by adding |
blackle
referenced this pull request
Apr 5, 2017
Closed
Allow users the ability to block an entire instance #937
Gargron
added
breaking
requires in depth
labels
Apr 10, 2017
wxcafe
added
help wanted
priority - high
labels
Apr 20, 2017
This was referenced Apr 20, 2017
wxcafe
closed this
Apr 24, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
tobascodagama
commented
Apr 24, 2017
|
Is there a reason this was closed? |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
staticsafe
Apr 24, 2017
Contributor
This issue is being tackled in issue #2381. You can follow that one for updates.
|
This issue is being tackled in issue #2381. You can follow that one for updates. |
deckycoss commentedJan 19, 2017
•
edited
Edited 1 time
-
deckycoss
edited Jan 19, 2017 (most recent)
this is a patch for issue #423. it's still in the early stages as it only implements the AccountDomainBlock model, and filtering out toots by blocked domains from the user's public timeline. the finished patch will update the API and provide an interface for the user to create domain blocks.
this builds off of @hach-que 's unfinished patch #302.