[musicbrainz-server] 14mwiencek opened pull request #3581 (03master…mbs-14075): MBS-14075: Adjust `edits_pending` for entities with open relationship edits https://github.com/metabrainz/musicbrainz-serve...
lucifer: i've tried to use the endpoints to use cliend id & secrest dynamically! but somtimes i get auth_url and somtimes getting this error... (full message at <https://matrix.chatbrainz.org/_matrix/media/v3/...>)
i think ive to wait now! again for testing limit reached per one day!!
when first i redirected to authorise i got error: invalid access token! something like that!
allen joined the channel
Maxr1998_ joined the channel
Maxr1998 has quit
reosarevok[m]
Jade, aerozol, julian45: heh, just noticed a small issue with the moving-to-automated-email option for autoeditor elections. Right now we link to the *forum* thread where the proposer explains why they think the person should be an autoeditor.
But that's not really something that can be automated, unless we require a forum thread link when proposing someone and store it in the database...
The current template:
reosarevok[m] sent a code block: https://matrix.chatbrainz.org/_matrix/media/v3/download/chatbrainz.org/VVlOlocbPFVDMEJtjYwSekEb
julian45[m]
that doesn't seem like too much of a lift IMO
if discourse supports some form of delegated auth or "seeding" harmony-style, maybe one possible path would be to create the post as part of the election initiation process, in a somewhat automated manner? (delegated auth = discourse programmatically posts on user's behalf after obtaining consent, seeding = flow where user is redirected to discourse to create a post, then once the post is up it redirects back to MB to proceed with
the rest of the initiation process)
but if neither of those is possible, it may be simplest to just require a link to forum post when nominating, then simply have the nominator update their forum post w/ the MB election link once the election has begun?
Jade[m]1
Would be a bit more complex, but is possible
I could also change the process a bit so that the thread is started by a bot, if delegation doesn't work
s/I//
reosarevok[m]
I mean, if we just have a bot-started thread, then we might as well just send the mail :)
(and link to the election directly)
We currently point to the thread because it involves the proposer giving proper reasonings and whatnot
I mean, I guess in a way it would be like the old way (where the election sent an automated email to the elections mailing list and the proposer wrote back with their reasoning)
It's just easier to skip responding to a forum thread which doesn't come to your email (but that might be me being old and thinking people read and react to their emails more than browser stuff)
Jade[m]1
reosarevok[m]: Could have it so the proposer puts the reasoning in the proposal directly
reosarevok[m]: I mean this is always an "it depends" thing lol
reosarevok[m]
Back in the day it wasn't because there weren't other options 😂
Jade[m]1: Hmm, maybe. I was thinking about avoiding code changes as much as possible but that could work I guess - we'd still need to figure a good way to post to the thread but I *assume* discourse offers something
(code changes to MBS itself other than "send email" I meant)
I would like aerozol to think about how the process could look like from the proposer's POV when around :)
Jade: do I understand correctly that I don't enter strings in the template itself, but in `en.json`?
(doing a first attempt at converting the template to the rust version)
kellnerd[m]: I guess we could also do that, it would mean any elections started without a post get ignored entirely but that already happens now, so
Jade[m]1
kellnerd[m]: I have no idea, but that did make me think of webhooks
reosarevok[m]
We do still want to send a message on closing though... I do wonder if a combination of the two approaches would make the most sense, if we can do the discourse thing properly
Automatically starting the thread (proposer gives reasoning during proposal on the site and it gets posted) and automatically posting a "congrats" or "sorry but nope" email on closing
s/email/post/
(ideally on accepting results the editor would also be added to the autoeditors group)
[all of these things remind me of why we just ignored it and kept making me send the emails by hand 😅]
Jade[m]1
reosarevok[m]: Yeah that makes sense
Discourse doesn't seem to have a nice flow like: app redirects to discourse -> user makes post -> app gets post ID
So I think the simplest solution would just be to have a bot account that takes in some markdown from the form
reosarevok[m]
But doesn't that have the same issue?
If we don't get the post id, I mean
Jade[m]1
reosarevok[m]: Hmm?
reosarevok[m]: If that flow existed, you could just not start the election until we got a valid link
reosarevok[m]
If the bot posts, we still need the post id to save it and post to the same thread on closing, no?
(I mean, I guess we could, if nothing else works, just make a second post on closing)
Jade[m]1
reosarevok[m]: What I would expect is that the create post endpoints returns the post ID
That's the normal style for these things
Looking for the endpoint now
<Jade[m]1> "What I would expect is that..." <- Yep this seems right
Could also set rely_to_post_numher to make it link back to that first post
reosarevok[m]
Sounds sensible. I wonder if it's possible to make discourse forcibly mail people even if they have not set up a mail preference?
Jade[m]1
Probably not xD
Or at least not for a specific post
reosarevok[m]
For the autoeditors category as kellnerd suggested, I was thinking
vardhan_ joined the channel
vardhan has quit
lucifer[m]
[@m.amanullah7:matrix.org](https://matrix.to/#/@m.amanullah7:matrix.org) okay I see what's happening, do this. If the database already has a funkwhale server for the given host url even if a different user, reuse that client id and client secret.
I'll a database schema change later to make this simpler.
[@holycow23:matrix.org](https://matrix.to/#/@holycow23:matrix.org) I see, I'll try to reproduce the issue and fix it today.
mamanullah7[m]
lucifer[m]: Sure!
rayyan_seliya123
hey lucifer: I noticed that in my latest push I am not using any models for my indexer implementation and not importing it in my indexer script though it is still present in `models.py` I was thinking should we remove this unused models as of now or keep it ? what would you prefer because the IA metadata is so variable and we are using flexible `dict/SQL` approach, so what would you prefer and any updates on my PR ??
mayhem[m]
julian45: how about the VM? can we nuke it yet?
julian45[m]
yep, go ahead and nuke
mayhem[m]
oki
julian45[m]
💥
mayhem[m]
that was authtestbox VM, yes?
julian45[m]
yep
mayhem[m]
done.
julian45[m] uploaded an image: (31KiB) < https://matrix.chatbrainz.org/_matrix/media/v3/download/julian45.net/Ut7RJmRi13TS7W9yOmdFOtRR3sky0VTw/ima_8bb9ff2.jpeg >
mayhem[m] jumps
reosarevok[m]
Now I remembered another reason why we mail - there's 100 people in the autoeditors discourse group, and 250 or so autoeditors total
On the other hand, I suspect autoeditors who do vote are mostly going to be the ones who have a discourse account
And would not be opposed to just say "sorry, you don't hear of elections if you're not on discourse"
Left a quick summary of what we talked plus a chatlog link in MBS-14066 for now
lucifer: Hello! Talking to ansh right now about the recording page, and we were wondering if we already have listening stats at the recording level, specifically the "top listeners" stats we have on entity pages
lucifer[m]
monkey: nope
monkey[m]
Thanks, we suspected as much, thanks for confirming
ansh[m]
lucifer: Where do we have the cache tables hosted? Wanted to check what all information we have for a specific recording
