46 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
46 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
---
|
|
summary: Handling invites from /initialSync is unintuitive
|
|
---
|
|
created: 2014-10-17 16:17:47.0
|
|
creator: kegan
|
|
description: |-
|
|
There are 2 very different ways of recognising invites currently.
|
|
|
|
The first is when you are listening on the event stream and someone invites you: you get an {{m.room.member}} event which contains the invite. I like this because it is the same as when other people invite other people, it's all nice and consistent.
|
|
|
|
The second way is if you were NOT listening on the event stream and therefore hit {{/initialSync}} at a later time. Then, it comes down as this non-event, with {{membership}} and {{inviter}} keys. This does strictly contain the required information, but why not use the {{state}} array and dump the actual {{m.room.member}} event there?
|
|
|
|
As a result of this duality, clients have to have 2 separate ways of handling invites, and the latter is *horrible* since it isn't even coming down as an Event object!!
|
|
id: '10481'
|
|
key: SPEC-54
|
|
number: '54'
|
|
priority: '2'
|
|
project: '10001'
|
|
reporter: kegan
|
|
resolution: '1'
|
|
resolutiondate: 2015-01-21 11:57:21.0
|
|
status: '5'
|
|
type: '1'
|
|
updated: 2015-01-21 11:57:21.0
|
|
votes: '1'
|
|
watches: '2'
|
|
workflowId: '10585'
|
|
---
|
|
actions:
|
|
- author: manu
|
|
body: Having an {{m.room.member event}} in {{/initialSync}} for invitation will be helpful to get more information like the invitation timestamp
|
|
created: 2014-11-20 15:09:53.0
|
|
id: '10817'
|
|
issue: '10481'
|
|
type: comment
|
|
updateauthor: manu
|
|
updated: 2014-11-20 15:09:53.0
|
|
- author: kegan
|
|
body: 'Landed on master: {{drafts/general_api.rst}}'
|
|
created: 2015-01-21 11:57:21.0
|
|
id: '11173'
|
|
issue: '10481'
|
|
type: comment
|
|
updateauthor: kegan
|
|
updated: 2015-01-21 11:57:21.0
|