A good start I think, but still some work to do. If we go ahead with
https://github.com/flarum/core/issues/132#issuecomment-117507974 (which
I am in favour of), we can extract the entity-related stuff into some
smaller service providers (e.g. discussion repo, an event listener,
permissions, and gambits stuff could all go in
Flarum\Core\Discussions\DiscussionsServiceProvider).
Also disallow the first post in a discussion to be deleted or hidden
(thus preventing discussions with zero posts)
closesflarum/core#90closesflarum/core#92
Only preloading data for basic requests w/o query params, at least for
the moment - if we have to preload for something like
/?q=test&sort=newest, we end up having to duplicate a whole lot of
logic between JS/PHP.
Explained in d1e7453ffd.
If we ever come up with a better way of doing this it should be easy to
change over, since modification of these properties by extensions is
abstracted by an Extend API.
All routes are now stored in a RouteCollection, which is then used
for dispatching by the (reusable) RouterMiddleware.
This change also entails moving all routes to the service providers.
This may be changed again later, and is done for convenience reasons
right now.
@franzliedke I didn’t realise that static properties are static to the
class they are defined on, and not each individual subclass. All of the
static members of the SerializeAction class (which are intended for
extensions to alter per-action) are being inherited by all actions.
Any ideas on how to work around this other than defining every static
member on each individual subclass?
Get rid of Permissible - too complex and inefficient. Replace with:
- a “Locked” trait which works similarly but only evaluates logic on
hydrated models.
- a “VisibleScope” trait which also works similarly but only scopes
queries
This is all we need, Permissible is overkill. There is only one
instance where we have to duplicate some logic
(Discussion::scopeVisiblePosts and Post::allow(‘view’, …)) but it’s
barely anything.
Haven’t decoupled for now, we can definitely look at doing that later.
Permissions table seeder slightly updated.
Also did a bit of a query audit, there’s still a lot to be done but
it’s much better than it was. Some relatively low-hanging fruit
detailed in EloquentPostRepository.
It works but it’s not the most pretty thing in the world. @franzliedke
Would be great if you could take a look at the whole formatting API and
work your magic on it sometime… my brain is fried!
This required some interface changes (mostly changing Laravel's or
Symfony's request and response classes to those of Zend's Diactoros.
Some smaller changes to the execution flow in a few of the abstract
action base classes, but nothing substantial.
Note: The request and response classes are immutable, so we usually
need to return new instances after modifying the old ones.
Originally the user activity feed was implemented using UNIONs. I was
looking at make an API to add activity “sources”, or extra UNION
queries (select from posts, mentions, etc.) but quickly realised that
this is too slow and there’s no way to make it scale.
So I’ve implemented an API which is very similar to how notifications
work (see previous commit). The `activity` table is an aggregation of
stuff that happens, and it’s kept in sync by an ActivitySyncer which is
used whenever a post it created/edited/deleted, a user is
mentioned/unmentioned, etc.
Again, the API is very simple (see Core\Activity\PostedActivity +
Core\Handlers\Events\UserActivitySyncer)
It turns out that the idea of “sending” a notification is flawed. (What
happens if the notification subject is deleted shortly after? The
notified user would end up with a dud notification which would be
confusing. What about if a post is edited to mention an extra user? If
you sent out notifications, the users who’ve already been mentioned
would get a duplicate notification.)
Instead, I’ve introduced the idea of notification “syncing”. Whenever a
change is made to a piece of data (e.g. a post is created, edited, or
deleted), you make a common notification and “sync” it to a set of
users. The users who’ve received this notification before won’t get it
again. It will be sent out to new users, and hidden from users who’ve
received it before but are no longer recipients (e.g. users who’ve been
“unmentioned” in a post).
To keep track of this, we use the existing notifications database
table, with an added `is_deleted` column. The syncing/diffing is
handled all behind the scenes; the API is extremely simple (see
Core\Notifications\DiscussionRenamedNotification +
Core\Events\Handlers\DiscussionRenamedNotifier)
