Рецензенты
Запросить отзыв
Нет рецензентов
Метки
Очистить метки
Related to the REST API
Code running on the server
Stuff related to Federation
Related to the front-end
Translations, and related code
More about project management or code than the project itself
The building, or installation process of Plume
Something isn't working
We need to talk
New feature or request
This is a new feature
Compatibility with different browsers, readers and OS
Related to an external package that Plume uses
UI/UX related issues and PRs
Good for newcomers
Extra attention is needed
Issues affecting only mobile UX
How elements're rendered out for the end user
Something else needs to be fixed first
This issue or pull request already exists
This PR is not complete yet
Issues concern a limited number of instances
This doesn't seem right
Need to be discussed by the community (on Loomio)
This PR is ready to be reviewed
Proposed ideas worth considering
This is issue has been created after a vote on Loomio
This will not be worked on
Применить метки
A: API
Related to the REST API
A: Backend
Code running on the server
A: Federation
Stuff related to Federation
A: Front-End
Related to the front-end
A: I18N
Translations, and related code
A: Meta
More about project management or code than the project itself
A: Security
Build
The building, or installation process of Plume
C: Bug
Something isn't working
C: Discussion
We need to talk
C: Enhancement
New feature or request
C: Feature
This is a new feature
Compatibility
Compatibility with different browsers, readers and OS
Dependency
Related to an external package that Plume uses
Design
UI/UX related issues and PRs
Documentation
Good first issue
Good for newcomers
Help welcome
Extra attention is needed
Mobile
Issues affecting only mobile UX
Rendering
How elements're rendered out for the end user
S: Blocked
Something else needs to be fixed first
S: Duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists
S: Incomplete
This PR is not complete yet
S: Instance specific
Issues concern a limited number of instances
S: Invalid
This doesn't seem right
S: Needs Voting/Discussion
Need to be discussed by the community (on Loomio)
S: Ready for review
This PR is ready to be reviewed
Suggestion
Proposed ideas worth considering
S: Voted on Loomio
This is issue has been created after a vote on Loomio
S: Wontfix
This will not be worked on
Нет меток
A: API
A: Backend
A: Federation
A: Front-End
A: I18N
A: Meta
A: Security
Build
C: Bug
C: Discussion
C: Enhancement
C: Feature
Compatibility
Dependency
Design
Documentation
Good first issue
Help welcome
Mobile
Rendering
S: Blocked
S: Duplicate
S: Incomplete
S: Instance specific
S: Invalid
S: Needs Voting/Discussion
S: Ready for review
Suggestion
S: Voted on Loomio
S: Wontfix
Этап
Установить этап
Очистить этап
Нет элементов
Нет этапа
Назначенные
Назначить пользователей
Убрать ответственных
Нет назначенных лиц
1 участников
Уведомления
Срок выполнения
Срок действия недействителен или находится за пределами допустимого диапазона. Пожалуйста, используйте формат 'гггг-мм-дд'.
Срок выполнения не установлен.
Зависимости
Зависимостей нет.
Reference: Plume/Plume#446
Ссылка в новой задаче
Пока нет содержимого.
Удалить ветку 'update_nodeinfo_433'
Удаление ветки НЕОБРАТИМО. Действительно удалить?
Нет
Да
Fix #433
I added the repo link to Cargo.toml so that
software.repository
could be configurable like @rhaamo suggested. I don't know if it's ok to includesoftware.repository
without bumping the schema version, but I didn't know if that would break any clients that parse nodeinfo with a hardcoded schema version.software.repository
is nodeinfo 2.1 only, you can however have 2.0 and 2.1 side by side, only the json for 2.1 will returns the repository key.But that will introduce another thing to do, plume use
https://xxx/nodeinfo
so it would need to becamehttps://xxx/nodeinfo/version
or something like that.keeping 2.0 would be good anyway for compatibility.
and for the schema version, if you add repository in a 2.0 version it will break on any parser forcing a validation, since 2.0 schema doesn't allow repository.
Ok. I'll update that. Is it ok to make it two separate endpoints,
/nodeinfo/2.0
and/nodeinfo/2.1
since those are the only ones we provide or should the version be parameterized?Codecov Report
Thank you! For the versions, adding a parameter in the route could indeed do the job. And I'm not sure the
json!
macro allows it, but if possible only add the repository field if the requested version is 2.1Thank you! 👍
Рецензенты
7bac70a483
.Шаг 1:
В репозитории вашего проекта посмотрите новую ветку и протестируйте изменения.Шаг 2:
Объединить изменения и обновить на Forgejo.