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.
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.
* 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
