Page MenuHomePhabricator
Differential D10065

[Flow202] Fix rebasing mistakes in D9984
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by ashoat on Nov 28 2023, 6:35 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F6238575: D10065.diff
Thu, Apr 24, 6:27 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 17, 11:38 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 17, 10:34 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 17, 12:08 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Apr 16, 12:57 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Apr 9, 12:13 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Apr 9, 12:26 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Apr 8, 9:04 PM
View All 77 Files
Subscribers
tomek

Details

Reviewers
marcin
Commits
rCOMMf4e61ed90d7f: [Flow202] Fix rebasing mistakes in D9984
Summary

Context here. This was the accepted solution in D9984, but I accidentally undid it during rebasing.

Test Plan

Flow

Diff Detail

Repository
rCOMM Comm
Branch
ashoat/postflow
Lint
No Lint Coverage
Unit
No Test Coverage

Revision Contents
Changeset List

PathSize
lib/
flow-typed/
11 lines
web/
account/
4 lines
push-notif/
22 lines

Diff 33936

View Options

lib/flow-typed/web-crypto-common.js

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 56 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Linesexport const updateRelationshipMessageSpec: UpdateRelationshipMessageSpec =
Object.freeze({ Object.freeze({
messageContentForServerDB( messageContentForServerDB(
data: data:
| LegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageData | LegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageData
| RawLegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo | RawLegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo
| UpdateRelationshipMessageData | UpdateRelationshipMessageData
| RawUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo, | RawUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo,
): string { ): string {
if (
data.type === messageTypes.UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP &&
tomekUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

Do we have to check this condition?

tomek: Do we have to check this condition?
atulAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Yeah, the reason we need to check this is because updateRelationshipMessageSpec is used for both LEGACY_UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP and UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP messages.

atul: Yeah, the reason we need to check this is because `updateRelationshipMessageSpec` is used for…
atulAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

JK, I think what you're saying is that data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual' would be a sufficient check since that implicitly tells us that the message type is UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP so having both is a bit redundant.

Personally prefer including the first clause since it makes things more clear IMO, but can remove if others feel otherwise

atul: JK, I think what you're saying is that `data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual'` would be a…
tomekUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

Ok, we can keep both conditions.

tomek: Ok, we can keep both conditions.
data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual'
) {
return JSON.stringify({
operation: data.operation,
targetID: data.targetID,
creatorFID: data.creatorFID,
targetFID: data.targetFID,
});
}
return JSON.stringify({ return JSON.stringify({
operation: data.operation, operation: data.operation,
targetID: data.targetID, targetID: data.targetID,
}); });
}, },
messageContentForClientDB( messageContentForClientDB(
data: data:
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 238 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines
View Options

web/account/account-hooks.js

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 56 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Linesexport const updateRelationshipMessageSpec: UpdateRelationshipMessageSpec =
Object.freeze({ Object.freeze({
messageContentForServerDB( messageContentForServerDB(
data: data:
| LegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageData | LegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageData
| RawLegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo | RawLegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo
| UpdateRelationshipMessageData | UpdateRelationshipMessageData
| RawUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo, | RawUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo,
): string { ): string {
if (
data.type === messageTypes.UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP &&
tomekUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

Do we have to check this condition?

tomek: Do we have to check this condition?
atulAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Yeah, the reason we need to check this is because updateRelationshipMessageSpec is used for both LEGACY_UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP and UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP messages.

atul: Yeah, the reason we need to check this is because `updateRelationshipMessageSpec` is used for…
atulAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

JK, I think what you're saying is that data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual' would be a sufficient check since that implicitly tells us that the message type is UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP so having both is a bit redundant.

Personally prefer including the first clause since it makes things more clear IMO, but can remove if others feel otherwise

atul: JK, I think what you're saying is that `data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual'` would be a…
tomekUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

Ok, we can keep both conditions.

tomek: Ok, we can keep both conditions.
data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual'
) {
return JSON.stringify({
operation: data.operation,
targetID: data.targetID,
creatorFID: data.creatorFID,
targetFID: data.targetFID,
});
}
return JSON.stringify({ return JSON.stringify({
operation: data.operation, operation: data.operation,
targetID: data.targetID, targetID: data.targetID,
}); });
}, },
messageContentForClientDB( messageContentForClientDB(
data: data:
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 238 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines
View Options

web/push-notif/notif-crypto-utils.js

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 56 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Linesexport const updateRelationshipMessageSpec: UpdateRelationshipMessageSpec =
Object.freeze({ Object.freeze({
messageContentForServerDB( messageContentForServerDB(
data: data:
| LegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageData | LegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageData
| RawLegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo | RawLegacyUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo
| UpdateRelationshipMessageData | UpdateRelationshipMessageData
| RawUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo, | RawUpdateRelationshipMessageInfo,
): string { ): string {
if (
data.type === messageTypes.UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP &&
tomekUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

Do we have to check this condition?

tomek: Do we have to check this condition?
atulAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Yeah, the reason we need to check this is because updateRelationshipMessageSpec is used for both LEGACY_UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP and UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP messages.

atul: Yeah, the reason we need to check this is because `updateRelationshipMessageSpec` is used for…
atulAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

JK, I think what you're saying is that data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual' would be a sufficient check since that implicitly tells us that the message type is UPDATE_RELATIONSHIP so having both is a bit redundant.

Personally prefer including the first clause since it makes things more clear IMO, but can remove if others feel otherwise

atul: JK, I think what you're saying is that `data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual'` would be a…
tomekUnsubmitted
Not Done
Inline Actions

Ok, we can keep both conditions.

tomek: Ok, we can keep both conditions.
data.operation === 'farcaster_mutual'
) {
return JSON.stringify({
operation: data.operation,
targetID: data.targetID,
creatorFID: data.creatorFID,
targetFID: data.targetFID,
});
}
return JSON.stringify({ return JSON.stringify({
operation: data.operation, operation: data.operation,
targetID: data.targetID, targetID: data.targetID,
}); });
}, },
messageContentForClientDB( messageContentForClientDB(
data: data:
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 238 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines