Page MenuHomePhabricator

[keyserver] introduce deleteFarcasterChannelTag
ClosedPublic

Authored by ginsu on Fri, Apr 26, 12:32 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F1712297: D11813.id39592.diff
Tue, May 7, 2:19 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, May 6, 7:10 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, May 6, 12:53 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, May 6, 12:53 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, May 2, 3:59 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, May 1, 3:14 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Apr 30, 10:29 AM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

This diff introduces the barebones deleteFarcasterChannelTag function. For the scope of this project we just want this function to delete the farcaster channel tag blob from the blob service for now, with the intention that all the other necessary parts for this function (like permissions, updating the row in the community table on the keyserver to remove the blob holder will be added to this function as a follow up project that I will start shortly)

Depends on D11809

Test Plan

In my local stack I was able to use deleteFarcasterChannelTag to delete the farcaster channel => comm community blob.

I also confirmed that when the GATE_TAG_FARCASTER_CHANNEL gate is set to true the function throws a server error

Diff Detail

Repository
rCOMM Comm
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

ginsu edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
ginsu added reviewers: atul, bartek, tomek.
ginsu added inline comments.
lib/types/community-types.js
33 ↗(On Diff #39592)

In my next project, we will refactor this so the blob holder is no longer part of the request

tomek added inline comments.
lib/shared/community-utils.js
5 ↗(On Diff #39592)

The argument is farcasterChannelID and not a secret. For invite links, this argument is called secret because it is a link secret.

lib/types/community-types.js
31 ↗(On Diff #39592)

It doesn't seem we're using it. Is there a plan to start using it later?

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Mon, Apr 29, 1:18 AM
lib/types/community-types.js
31 ↗(On Diff #39592)

Yes we will use this in a subsequent diff that I will introduce. Sorry if this caused any confusion, will make sure that when I work in keyserver code + introduce endpoints in the future that my diffs are more clear + less dependent on subsequent diffs

address comments + rebase before landing

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds.Wed, May 1, 10:51 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.