It used a timer to sleep.
But time also goes on when doing other things, so depending on hardware, the timings could be off.
I slightly changed the tests so we still test what we functionally want.
Instead of waiting until the cache expires I now have a function to expire the test and use that.
That means we're not testing any more if the cache really expires after a certain amount of time,
but that's the responsability of the dependency imo, so shouldn't be a problem.
I also changed `Pleroma.Web.Endpoint, :http, :ip` to `127.0.0.1` because that's the setting people typically have,
and I see no reason to do it differently.
Especially since it's an exernal ip, which may come over as weird or suspicious to people.
It is possible for an earlier Update to be received by us later.
For this, we now
(1) only allows Updates to poll counts if there is no updated field,
or the updated field is the same as the last updated date or
creation date;
(2) does not allow updating anything if the updated field
is older than the last updated date or creation date;
(3) allows updating updatable fields otherwise (normal updates);
(4) if only the updated field is changed, it does not create
a new history item on its own.
In Create validator we do not validate the object data,
but that is because the object itself will go through the
pipeline again, which is not the case for Update. Thus,
we added validation for objects in Update activities.
I renamed some tags before, but forgot to rename the pipelines
I also had some tags which I forgot to add to the config, description, etc.
These have now been done/added
The previous pictures were labeled as public domain, but are actually a collage of pictures under other licenses.
I now replaced them with a jpeg of simply a white pixel.
I used keyword_list[:key], but if the key doesn't exist, it will return nil. I actually expect a list and further down the code I use that list.
I believe the key should always be present, but in case it's not, it's better to return an empty list instead of nil. That way the code wont fail further down the line.
During attachment upload Pleroma returns a "description" field. Pleroma-fe has an MR to use that to pre-fill the image description field, <https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma-fe/-/merge_requests/1399>
* This MR allows Pleroma to read the EXIF data during upload and return the description to the FE
* If a description is already present (e.g. because a previous module added it), it will use that
* Otherwise it will read from the EXIF data. First it will check -ImageDescription, if that's empty, it will check -iptc:Caption-Abstract
* If no description is found, it will simply return nil, just like before
* When people set up a new instance, they will be asked if they want to read metadata and this module will be activated if so
This was taken from an MR i did on Pleroma and isn't finished yet.
I first focussed on getting things working
Now that they do and we know what tags there are, I put some thought in providing better names
I use the form <what_it_controls>_<what_it_allows_you_to_do>
:statuses_read => :messages_read
:status_delete => :messages_delete
:user_read => :users_read
:user_deletion => :users_delete
:user_activation => :users_manage_activation_state
:user_invite => :users_manage_invites
:user_tag => :users_manage_tags
:user_credentials => :users_manage_credentials
:report_handle => :reports_manage_reports
:emoji_management => :emoji_manage_emoji
Tries fully-qualifying emoji when receiving them, by adding the emoji
variation sequence to the received reaction emoji.
This issue arises when other instance software, such as Misskey, tries
reacting with emoji that have unqualified or minimally qualified
variants, like a red heart. Pleroma only accepts fully qualified emoji
in emoji reactions, and refused those emoji. Now, Pleroma will attempt
to properly qualify them first, and reject them if checks still fail.
Deactivated users are only visible to users privileged with :user_activation since fc317f3b17
Here we also make sure the users who are deactivated get the status deactivated for users who are allowed to see these users
Instead of `Pleroma.User.all_superusers()` we now use `Pleroma.User.all_superusers(:report_handle)`
I also changed it for sending emails, but there were no tests.
This should eventually replace the Pleroma.User.all_superusers/0 function
* I added a new param `is_privileged` in User.query
* Now we can fetch all users with a specified privilege
Before we deleted the notifications, but that was a side effect and didn't always trigger any more.
Now we just hide them when an unprivileged user asks them.
This reverts commit 89667189b8 and cdc5bbe836.
This is a side effect when changing user role.
The goal was to not have report notifications when someone isn't admin or moderator any more.
But this won't be triggered when we change the privilege tags for a role, so we can't use this sollution any more.
There was another solution to filter out report notifications during fetch.
It wasn't merged because this seemed 'cleaner' at the time, but now it seems the better sollution.
I'll add it in the next commit.
I still had three endpoints I didn't really know what to do with them. I added them under separate tags
* :instance_delete
* :moderation_log_read
* :stats_read
I also checked and these are the last changes done by MR https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma/-/merge_requests/3480/diffs this is trying to fix
One of the things we do during the tests is change the config. But that's global state and different tests were interfering.
E.g. one test would set `clear_config([:instance, :admin_privileges], [:statuses_read])`, but while that runs, another test may
do `clear_config([:instance, :admin_privileges], [:user_invite])`. Now the code for the first test checks the setting, and it
finds `:user_invite` instead of `:statuses_read`.
Now the modules where this happens are marked to run synchronously, so they don't interfere with each other.
* rejected_shortcodes is defined as a list of strings in the
configuration description. As such, database-based configuration was
led to handle those settings as strings, and not as the actually
expected type, Regex.
* This caused each message passing through this MRF, if a rejected
shortcode was set and the emoji did not exist already on the instance,
to fail federating, as an exception was raised, swiftly caught and
mostly silenced.
* This commit fixes the issue by introducing new behavior: strings are
now handled as perfect matches for an emoji shortcode (meaning that if
the emoji-to-be-pulled's shortcode is in the blacklist, it will be
rejected), while still supporting Regex types as before.
It retrieved two ReportNotes and then checked one of them. But the order isn't guaranteed, while the test tested on the content of the first ReportNote.
I made the test on the content more generic
When someone isn't a superuser any more, they shouldn't see the reporsts any more either.
Here we delete the report notifications from a user when that user gets updated from being a superuser to a non-superuser.
elixir gettext current does not fully support fallback to another language [0].
But it might in the future. We adapt it so that all languages in Accept-Language
headers are received by Pleroma.Web.Gettext. User.languages is now a comma-separated
list.
[0]: https://github.com/elixir-gettext/gettext/issues/303
For an example, here, zh is not supported, but zh_Hans and zh_Hant
are. If the user asks for zh, we should choose a variant for them
instead of fallbacking to default.
Some browsers (e.g. Firefox) does not allow users to customize
their language codes. For example, there is no zh-Hans, but only
zh, zh-CN, zh-TW, zh-HK, etc. This provides a workaround for
those users suffering from bad design decisions.
For some reason I had a test who suddenly failed, mix test test/pleroma/web/o_auth/app_test.exs:54. A user has a list of applications and this test adds them and then sees if the list it gets back is the same as the apps it added.
When I ran mix test a day before I didn't have this problem and when I pushed code today in a different MR, the pipeline succeeded (see https://git.pleroma.social/ilja/pleroma/-/jobs/205827), yet locally it failed. So it seems the test can sometimes succeed and sometimes fail, which makes it untrustworthy.
The failure I see is because the returned list is in reverse order. I assume that's not per sé wrong. You just want to know if the apps you added are actually there. I fixed the test by first ordering the lists before comparing.
AFAICT (and as far as that's relevant) the test got introduced in commit cb2a072e62
Even though latest PleromaFE supports displaying these properly, mobile
apps still exist, so I think we should offer a workaround to those who
want it.
Elixir 1.13 does not allow them in raw form anymore, resulting in errors
like this when running the test:
== Compilation error in file test/pleroma/web/rich_media/parser_test.exs ==
** (SyntaxError) test/pleroma/web/rich_media/parser_test.exs:136:45: invalid bidirectional formatting character in string: \u202C. If you want to use such character, use it in its escaped \u202C form instead
0: Use the CommonAPI unfollow function to make sure the
unfollow activity is federated.
1: Limit the follow and unfollow to local followers only,
while let the romote servers decide whether to move their followers.
Ref: emit-move
Mastodon uses the Reject activity also for the purpose of removing
a follower, in addition to reject a follow request. We should
also update the original Follow activity in this case.
Notes:
- QuestionValidator didn't have a :name field but that seems like a mistake
- `_fields` functions can't inherit others because of some Validators
- bto/bcc fields were absent in activities, also seems like a mistake
(Well IIRC we don't or barely support bto/bcc anyway)
* Policies were put under a new module (Pleroma.Web.ActivityPub.MRF.Policy instead of Pleroma.Web.ActivityPub.MRF), but this wasn't changed in the Pleroma.Web.ActivityPub.MRF @mrf_config_descriptions
* I don't have a unit test to prevent similar problems in the future because I don't find a proper way to do it
* The descriptions in the unit tests are defined in the unit tests, so if someone changes module names in the code, the tests wont see it
* The list is generated in Pleroma.Docs.Generator.list_behaviour_implementations, but I can't do a check in the when clause of the function to see if the provided module is a behaviour or not.
Backport of: https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma/-/merge_requests/3509
* To see what front ends are installed, it ls static/frontends. When this folder doesn't exists yet, it will return an empty array.
* Installing still works since the folder is created during installation already
Backport of: https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma/-/merge_requests/3510
* To see what front ends are installed, it ls static/frontends. When this folder doesn't exists yet, it will return an empty array.
* Installing still works since the folder is created during installation already
* Policies were put under a new module (Pleroma.Web.ActivityPub.MRF.Policy instead of Pleroma.Web.ActivityPub.MRF), but this wasn't changed in the Pleroma.Web.ActivityPub.MRF @mrf_config_descriptions
* I don't have a unit test to prevent similar problems in the future because I don't find a proper way to do it
* The descriptions in the unit tests are defined in the unit tests, so if someone changes module names in the code, the tests wont see it
* The list is generated in Pleroma.Docs.Generator.list_behaviour_implementations, but I can't do a check in the when clause of the function to see if the provided module is a behaviour or not.
Added a new field in the nodeinfo called quarantined_instances_info
This holds an object like `"quarantined_instances_info":{"quarantined_instances":{"quar.inst":{"reason":"whatever reason"}}}}`
It's easiest (and imo most proper) to use tuples {"instance, "reason"} in BE,
but for FE maps like %{"instance": "instance", "reason", "reason"} are better.
I changed it so that node_info returns maps now for simple_policy and quarantined instances.
When a setting was deprecated, the code would stop checking for the rest of the possible deprications. This also meant that the settings weren't rewritten to the new settings for deprecated settings besides the first one.
