| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
We're removing the context manager due to async concerns, so we'll go
back to the old approach again of ignoring specific messages and
iterating history.
|
|
This reverts commit 0737b1a6
This isn't gonna work, because async is a thing.
|
|
This command was written to support only a single channel, and with the
move to multi-channel purges, we need to rethink the way the invocation
deletion happens. We may be invoking this command from a completely
different channel, so we can't necessarily look inside the channels
we're targeting for the invocation.
So, we're solving this by just deleting the invocation by using
ctx.message. We do this before we start iterating message history, and
then we only need to iterate the number of messages that was passed into
the command.
A much cleaner approach, which solves the bug reported and identified by
@MarkKoz.
|
|
This new context manager makes it easier to make the mod_log ignore
actions like message deletions. The only existing method is the
`ignore()` method, which requires that you pass all the messages you
want to ignore into it.
This one just ignores everything inside its scope.
This isn't the DRYest approach, but it's low-cost and improves the
readability of clean.py quite a bit. Ideally we should go through and
give modlog a proper cleanup, because it's kinda ugly right now.
|
|
Thanks @MarkKoz!
|
|
Co-authored-by: Mark <[email protected]>
|
|
We do not wanna process bot messages.
|
|
|
|
We can now pass in as many channel mentions as we want after any !purge
command - for example `!purge all 5 #python-general #python-language`
|
|
This creates a clickable link in the response embed. Referencing the
category is no longer necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co-authored-by: Mark <[email protected]>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not all operating systems use UTF-8 as the default encoding. For systems
that don't, reading tag files with Unicode would cause an unhandled
exception.
(cherry picked from commit adc75ff9bbcf8b905bd78c78f253522ae5e42fc3)
|
|
It's no longer needed, and causes problems with anti-raid and anti-spam.
|
|
Discord has introduced a new, strict rate limit for individual channel
edits that reduces the number of allow channel name/channel topic
changes to 2 per 10 minutes per channel.
Unfortunately, our help channel system frequently goes over that rate
limit as it edits the name and topic of a channel on all three "move"
actions we have: to available, to occupied, and to dormant. In addition,
our "unanswered" feature adds another channel name change on top of
the move-related edits.
That's why I've removed the topic/emoji changing features from the help
channel system. This means we now have a generic topic that fits all
three categories and no status emojis in the channel names.
|
|
The `check_for_answer` method of the HelpChannels cog relies on the
channel->claimant cache being available. However, as this cache is
(currently) lost during bot restarts, this method may fail with a
KeyError exception.
I've used `dict.get` with an `if not claimant: return` to circumvent
this issue.
|
|
Sometimes a mailing list user doesn't press respond correctly to the email, and so a response is sent as a separate thread. To keep only new threads in the channel, we need to ignore those.
|
|
|
|
This addresses a review comment by @aeros.
|
|
The bot can get into trouble in three distinct ways:
- It has no Bot instance
- It has no namespace
- It has no parent instance.
These happen only if you're using it wrong. To make the test more
precise, and to add a little bit more readability (RuntimeError could be
anything!), we'll introduce some custom exceptions for these three
states.
This addresses a review comment by @aeros.
|
|
|
|
- Refactor error messages in _to_typestring and _from_typestring to just
print the prefix tuples instead of that custom error string.
- Create a RedisKeyOrValue type to simplify some annotations.
- Simplify partialmethod calls.
- Make the signatures for _to_typestring and _from_typestring one-liners
- Fix a typo in the errors.
|
|
I should be shot.
|
|
We're using functools.partialmethod to make the code a little cleaner
and more readable here.
Read more about them here:
https://docs.python.org/3/library/functools.html#functools.partial
https://docs.python.org/3/library/functools.html#functools.partialmethod
|
|
Also added a test for this.
This is the DRYest approach I could find. It's a little ugly, but I
think it's probably good enough.
|
|
|
|
This check was no longer being used anywhere, having been replaced by
in_whitelist_check.
|
|
The way we were doing the asyncio.Lock() stuff for increment was
slightly problematic. @aeros has adviced us that it's better to just
initialize the lock as None in __init__, and then initialize it inside
the first coroutine that uses it instead. This ensures that the correct
loop gets attached to the lock, so we don't end up getting errors like
this one:
RuntimeError: got Future <Future pending> attached to a different loop
This happens because the lock and the actual calling coroutines aren't
on the same loop. When creating a new test, test_increment_lock, we
discovered that we needed a small refactor here and also in the test
class to make this new test pass.
So, now we're creating a DummyCog for every test method, and this will
ensure the loop streams never cross. Cause we all know we must never
cross the streams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a companion commit to this PR:
https://github.com/python-discord/site/pull/356
This PR must be merged before this commit.
|
|
For example, we don't want the mod commands to produce any kind of error
message when run by ordinary users in regular channels - these should
have the perception of being invisible and unavailable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We're moving the actual predicate into the `utils.checks` folder, just
like we're doing with most of the other decorators. This is to allow us
the flexibility to use it as a pure check, not only as a decorator.
This commit doesn't actually change any functionality, just moves it
around.
|
|
|
|
This just tests that the various RuntimeErrors are reachable - that
includes the error about not having a bot instance, the one about not
being a class attribute, and the one about not having instantiated the
class.
This test addresses a concern raised by @MarkKoz in a review.
I've decided not to test that actual contents of these RuntimeErrors,
because I believe that sort of testing is a bit too brittle. It
shouldn't break a test just to change the content of an error string.
|
|
|
|
Thanks @MarkKoz!
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you passed a key for a value that was the same as your optional, it
would just return it but not delete it. This edge case isn't worth it,
so I'm just removing that condition and letting the extra API call fly.
|
Leon Sandøy
Leon Sandøy
kwzrd
ks129
MarkKoz
Sebastiaan Zeeff
Matteo Bertucci
Dennis Pham