Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
MSC4151: Reporting rooms #1938
MSC4151: Reporting rooms #1938
Changes from 3 commits
fb71935
ab88044
9d63f31
1cf5104
3aad778
414001a
8c8c37d
00d4e6d
883e9e3
c2b90d5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I removed this here because it only applies to event reporting and is repeated in the corresponding endpoint's documentation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The MSC made this required to align with the event reporting endpoint. However, MSC2414 made both body parameters on that endpoint optional. Therefore, I made
reaaon
optional here, too.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Given the event reporting endpoint already has the parameters marked as optional, and MSC2414 was trying to match that endpoint, making them optional here too looks like the right thing to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm unsure what consequences changing this has but the old ID felt unsuitable now that there are two endpoints in the module.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks like it's used to generate bindings, and as such we probably shouldn't change it...
matrix-spec/meta/documentation_style.rst
Lines 113 to 114 in 2cbf606
@turt2live curious if you happen to know more about this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suppose if we want to be safe, keeping
operationId: reportContent
on the existing endpoint andoperationId: reportRoom
on the new one would not be the end of the world. So maybe reverting back would be best?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed,
operationId
usually ends up as the method or class name in generated APIs, and therefore, may (actually will, in the vast majority of cases) break the generated code. However, given that even more fine-grained changes (e.g. adding a field in a request body) that are API-compatible in JSON may be breaking in the generated code (depending on the target language and/or the shape of the API) authors producing auto-generated code have to be careful with any upgrades of the API definitions. In particular, 1.12 has already introduced breaking changes elsewhere from the Quotient perspective. So I wouldn't be too concerned around it, just be cognisant that not everything back-compatible in JSON remains such in a native API.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We concluded in #matrix-docs:matrix.org that changing the operation ID is not ideal but acceptable in this case as otherwise it'll be even harder to fix in future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have removed this as proposed in MSC2414 and thought it aligns well enough with the rest of this pull request to sneak in. 😇