evazion said:
The notes bug and @Chimera99's problem with touch.pixiv.net should be fixed now.
Duly acknowledged, thank you, and apologies for my semantic confusion over the correct term for what http://devbooru.evazion.ml:3000/ is.
Posted under General
This topic has been locked.
evazion said:
The notes bug and @Chimera99's problem with touch.pixiv.net should be fixed now.
Duly acknowledged, thank you, and apologies for my semantic confusion over the correct term for what http://devbooru.evazion.ml:3000/ is.
I recall you recently changing things in request approvals? There's a couple of things going weird now:
1) BUR creates an approval message for every approved line. See topic #12876.
2) Alias rejection message became more descriptive (forum #13345), but for implications it remained the same as before.
3) The post changes made by approving requests are now attributed to the users that made the requests, instead of admin approving the request. I don't mind at all, but was this intended, and wouldn't we fly into permission issue, for example if member-level user requests mass-update of 3+ tag query?
E: oh, and 3 is also unusually selective. It recorded hakama changes (the only BUR approved today) under my user, but the rest of implication approvals were recorded under their respective creators.
Updated by Type-kun
1) BUR creates an approval message for every approved line. See topic #12876.
I broke that while fixing BURs to record the approver for each alias/implication in the BUR (it wasn't previously). Oops. Submitted a fix for it (issue #2752).
2) Alias rejection message became more descriptive (forum #13345), but for implications it remained the same as before.
Forgot to update the messages on implications. I can do that later.
The post changes made by approving requests are now attributed to the users that made the requests, instead of admin approving the request.
Didn't change that, but I noticed that while working on it and thought it was weird. See here). AFAICT it's worked this way all along, since commit e106f70b in 2011.
The reason it behaves differently for BURs is that when an individual alias/implication is requested, the pending alias/implication is created under the requester's name. But when a BUR is requested it doesn't create pending aliases/implications first, it waits until after the admin approves the BUR. Then it creates them under the admin's name, which is perhaps wrong, it should be under the requester's name.
This also means it's possible to have pending BURs requesting conflicting aliases/implications, which may or may not be desirable?
EDIT: also I don't think there are pemissions issues, aliases/implications do a `Post.raw_tag_match` search which should ignore all restrictions, and mass updates do the update under the approver's account. Which is perhaps another bug, using the approver there but creator elsewhere is not consistent.
Updated by evazion
Oh, my bad about 3. I assumed all approvals go under approver's name, but turns out I was mainly working with BURs all the time.
This also means it's possible to have pending BURs requesting conflicting aliases/implications, which may or may not be desirable?
Should probably be left as-is, so that people can disagree and submit different requests.
wiki #4831
Every time, I click the "Show" buttons of the Table of Contents, the "spoiler box" doesn't stay open, but it closes instantly, so I can't navigate the subitems of that page. Is that known?
Provence said:
wiki #4831
Every time, I click the "Show" buttons of the Table of Contents, the "spoiler box" doesn't stay open, but it closes instantly, so I can't navigate the subitems of that page. Is that known?
What table of contents? There is no expand box in the page you linked. Are you sure it's not coming from userscript?
Yes... sometimes comments, such as informational comments, can disturb the flow of the conversation. Being able to downvote your own comments allows you to make your comment effectively hidden, but still there if someone wants to see it.
Upvoting your own comments though is like upvoting your own uploads... utterly pointless IMHO...
I don't think many people would think to use the Show All Comments function to find an informational one rather than the usual use of showing all the "junk" comments. In that case I think it makes more sense to use an expand tag.
A big wall of text goes here
OOZ662 said:
I don't think many people would think to use the Show All Comments function to find an informational one rather than the usual use of showing all the "junk" comments. In that case I think it makes more sense to use an expand tag.
Optional subject goes here
A big wall of text goes here
Exactly. It seems off that it is possible to down vote one own posts and if you posted junk, one can upvote the stupid comment. I think other's should decide if one post should get down/upvoted.
It's a peanuts issue, but still off in my eyes.
Submitted a patch to disallow upvoting your own comments (issue #2754). Honestly though, a single upvote shouldn't be enough to matter, except it does because so few people vote. I'd rather show comment scores so we get more people voting. Was there any reason they aren't shown?
evazion said:
Submitted a patch to disallow upvoting your own comments (issue #2754). Honestly though, a single upvote shouldn't be enough to matter, except it does because so few people vote. I'd rather show comment scores so we get more people voting. Was there any reason they aren't shown?
issue #1702. Basically, we didn't need more people trying to be witty and funny to get upvotes, it's bad enough as-is :3 Anyone who's curious enough to see the scores can use any of the userscripts that allows it.