cadence/out-of-your-element
cadence/out-of-your-element
3
7
Fork 6
Code Issues 18 Pull requests 3 Releases 27 Activity

WIP: feature: threads'n'forums #74

Draft
Guzio wants to merge 109 commits from Guzio/out-of-your-element:mergable-fr-fr into main
pull from: Guzio/out-of-your-element:mergable-fr-fr
merge into: cadence:main
Conversation 6 Commits 109 Files changed 17 +358 -58
Guzio commented 2026-03-02 15:43:27 +00:00
First-time contributor
Copy link
  • /thread command is more responsive to context such as replies
  • /thread prints usage if used without commands
  • All threads started are noted as Matrix threads so they can be accessed from the threads menu of supporting clients (but you still have to click the link to go to a thread room)
  • Nags users if they create Matrix threads
- /thread command is more responsive to context such as replies - /thread prints usage if used without commands - All threads started are noted as Matrix threads so they can be accessed from the threads menu of supporting clients (but you still have to click the link to go to a thread room) - Nags users if they create Matrix threads
Guzio added 7 commits 2026-03-02 15:43:29 +00:00 
* The guard() function in m2d/event-dispatcher.js no longer takes (any, any), but a string and a function.

* m2d/send-event.js no longer complains that res.body has some missing fields. It would appear as though those missing fields weren't revelant to the fromWeb() function (into which res.body is passed), given that this code worked before and still contunes to work, so I just @ts-ignore'd res.body

This commit's developer's off-topic personal comment, related to this commit: This has nothing to do with improving thread UX, even tho this is what I was supposed to work on. However, in my attempts to discover in what file should I start, I stumbled upon those errors from m2d/send-event.js, so I fixed them. And after establishing that m2d/event-dispatcher.js is the file that I'm looking for, I also noticed that guard()'s @parm definitions could be improved, so I did that. Now - back to thread work...
* To better reflect reality ("m.in_reply_to" will not always be present - it's not (always?) found on "rel_type":"m.replace" relation-events)

* To support "rel_type":"m.replace" relation-events (added "m.replace" option to existing key "rel_type" and a new "is_falling_back" key)

AFFECTED TYPES: M_Room_Message, M_Room_Message_File, M_Room_Message_Encrypted_File

BREAKS: Nothing, as .d.ts files don't affect buisness logic. In terms of lint errors: Marking "m.in_reply_to" as optional is indeed technically a "breaking change" (TypeScript may complain about „is probably undefined” in places where it didn't before), but from early "testing" (ie. looking at VSCode's errors tab), it doesn't seem like anything broke, as no file that imports any of those 3 types (Or their Outer_ counterparts) has „lit up” with errors (unless I missed something). There was one type error found in m2d/converters/event-to-message.js, at line 1009, but that seemed unrelated to types.d.ts - nevertheless, that error was also corrected in this commit, by adding proper type annotations somewhere else in the affected file.
/This is a squash-commit - the following is a rough summary of all sub-commits, written in style of commit messages (not necessarily those commits themselves), ie. short and in present tense./

* Document design choice to not bridge Discord threads as Matrix threads [by directly quoting Cadence]
* Alter thread-to-announcement, so that it replies in-thread [with this, Matrix users will get a list of almost all (exl. those that don't branch from anything) open threads on a given channel, whereas before it wasn't possible. Also features slight alterations to the text]
* Notify the user, whenever an in-thread message on Matrix is sent, that this isn't how they're supposed to do threads on OOYE
* Detect /thread being ran as a reply or in-thread to branch the thread from the relevant message
* Handle various /thread errors [notably being ran without args (infer the title if ran in the context above, simply show help if not)]
*  Whenever possible, direct the user to an already-existing thread-room [if /thread was ran as a reply or in-thread, or as part of the notification mentioned in point 3 (feat. a new utility method)]

AUXILIARY TYPE CHANGES (not always relevant to UX-improvement-related changes):
* Fix „boolean” being referred to as „bool” in types.d.ts
* Rename execute(event) in matrix-command-handler is now parseAndExecute(event) [and it is no longer of type CommandExecute, but has its own custom definition, because a) it has a different return now (returns what command was ran (needed for point 3 in section above) instead of always undefined and b) other params from CommandExecute (like ctx or words) weren't being used - quite the contrary, their values were only being created at that stage (as part of command parsing - hence the rename, too), so telling that they're values you pass into execute() was at least somewhat confusing]
* Further narrow-down the type of guard() in m2d event-dispatcher

TEST CHANGES:
* Create 7 new tests, all pass
* Update 4 existing threads, all pass
* Pass all other relevant tests [and almost all other tests, too - there are some issues with event2message for stickers, but given the fact that this commit does not touch the stickers subsystem in any way at all,  it does not seem like they are any way related to my changes and they must've been failing before]
* Do extensive manual testing and debugging
Co-authored-by: Guzio <guzekk@protonmail.com>
Co-committed-by: Guzio <guzekk@protonmail.com>
beanie commented 2026-03-02 19:42:31 +00:00
Contributor
Copy link

@Guzio you can add the WIP: prefix to the PR which auto-flags it as work in progress :)

@Guzio you can add the `WIP: ` prefix to the PR which auto-flags it as work in progress :)
Guzio changed title from feat.: Thread improvements, round 1 to WIP: feat.: Thread improvements, round 1 2026-03-03 00:12:55 +00:00
Guzio commented 2026-03-03 00:18:18 +00:00
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

@beanie wrote in #74 (comment):

@Guzio you can add the WIP: prefix to the PR which auto-flags it as work in progress :)

I know - GitDab told me. I just decided it wouldn't be necessary because „surely, I'll finish that message in a few minutes; noone will ever even notice that this was WIP for a short while”.

...Cue-in me returning from uni, taking multiple-hour-long nap, and also taking much longer then anticipated to write the message. 😅

Marked this as WIP for now, will hopefully un-mark it over the course of the next 15 minutes.

@beanie wrote in https://gitdab.com/cadence/out-of-your-element/pulls/74#issuecomment-9082: > @Guzio you can add the `WIP: ` prefix to the PR which auto-flags it as work in progress :) I know - GitDab told me. I just decided it wouldn't be necessary because „surely, I'll finish that message in a few minutes; noone will ever even notice that this was WIP for a short while”. ...Cue-in me returning from uni, taking multiple-hour-long nap, and also taking much longer then anticipated to write the message. 😅 Marked this as WIP for now, will *hopefully* un-mark it over the course of the next 15 minutes.
Guzio changed title from WIP: feat.: Thread improvements, round 1 to feature: Thread improvements, round 1 2026-03-03 12:12:11 +00:00
Guzio commented 2026-03-03 20:46:49 +00:00
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

over the course of the next 15 minutes

took a tiny-bit longer than anticipated lol

But I'm done here, yaaayyy! Now awaiting feedback...

> over the course of the next 15 minutes took a tiny-bit longer than anticipated lol But I'm done here, yaaayyy! Now awaiting feedback...
❤️ 1
beanie commented 2026-03-08 02:43:14 +00:00
Contributor
Copy link

I might test this in the next few days, need a solution to bridge a few threads to rooms before Discord accounts expire

I might test this in the next few days, need a solution to bridge a few threads to rooms before Discord accounts expire
❤️ 1
Guzio changed title from feature: Thread improvements, round 1 to WIP: feature: Thread improvements, round 1 2026-03-11 10:48:36 +00:00
Guzio commented 2026-03-11 10:49:42 +00:00
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

Marked the PR as WIP again, to work on changes proposed in the Matrix discussion.

Marked the PR as WIP again, to work on changes proposed in the Matrix discussion.
Guzio added 75 commits 2026-04-15 20:05:03 +00:00 
At least final-until-we-make-it-so-that-new-rooms-are-autogenerated-when-a-thread-is-opened. Then we'd need to include the link to it instead of a command-help.
It's 23:42; I'm going just purely based on vibes at this point.

vibecoding but no AI, just eepy
Also, that message in thread-to-announcement was misleading, as now there's no guarantee that a thread was newly created (it could be very old, but freshly /thread-ed). So I changed that, too.

Also, while updating messages, I decided to slightly alter the „may not have been bridged to Discord in the way you thought it was gonna be”-warning in event-dispatcher.
In other news: Made /thread work without args (in SOME cases).

I'm pretty sure this is the final patch before we go PR.
So the code-key DOES exist. HuuuHhhhhh???
and yea, ofc it was a string......
As a part of that:
* rewrote the tests to support my changed behaviors
* added a missing case
* Made my „threads get attached to” wording more consistent with the test cases („threads branch from”), as I always felt that there was something off about my phrasing, but I couldn't quite tell what was it. OOYE's „branch” term seems much more fitting there
* slightly cooked the testing data (changed the „Hey.” thread from „floating” to being a branch of a message, to accommodate...)
* 3 NEW TESTS: of the function created in my previous commit (I'm not sure if this *REALLY* needed testing, given how braindead-simple that function is, but everything else in utils.js is covered, so I figured it's only fair to test this, too)

EXTRA CHANGE: fixed that function's name (we're getting the thread from a (Matrix) Event, not a (Discord) Message) and description (I totally didn't copy-paste the JSDoc from above........)
I passed a completely wrong event ID and was confused as to why could it possibly be failing. (Btw, as part od fixing that - my new function from function is utils.js now supports blank values.)

Also - and that's unrelated to the bug I was debugging - I put a guard clause in my if (words.length < 2) backwards. If->return should canonically be above the logic, even if it technically doesn't break said logic in this case (all it was doing was creating an extra step that says „yea, name the newly-created thread /thread, even if this name is very stupid, and also pointless because no thread creation is about to take place”. And while fixing that, I also did some minor changes to error handling.
just a little bit

I like it.

But it's just a little bit annoying.
Reviewed-on: Guzio/out-of-your-element#8
So that I can squash-merge it all without leaving the trace of any extra unsolicited changes
Turns out that auto-create is ALWAYS on for threads (which creates some hilarious situations, where the channel gets duplicated if it ever got unbridged). Also, manual bridging isn't even possible. Uhh... Sure! Let's just say, then, that it's the admin's problem to auto-create it (given the duplication - this is probably a better idea to leave it to them).

A proper fix for this (and also to limit (tho not fix) the dupe-by-autocreate problem) would probably be to allow for manual bridging on threads, but I really don't have time for this before The Merge (my ADHD is kicking-in on this update, and I have a feeling that if I don't PR soon, I'm gonna not do it for another 3 months).
Reviewed-on: Guzio/out-of-your-element#9
of course I did
I was not supposed to do more pulling, but I started seeing some instability and I want to see if it's me or main.
Both sides of creation (M2D and D2M) use ensureRoom() instead of syncRoom() because it's impossible to know which one will fire first, and we wouldn't want a double-sync. At the same time, calling ensureRoom() as a way to CREATE a thread-room is perfectly safe because „Naturally, the newly created room is already up to date, so we can always skip syncing here.” and also thread-rooms aren't subject to manual-mode restrictions, so we can skip all „Does a channel_room entry exists or guild autocreate = 1?” checks (actually, the comment probably should reflect that - so I updated the comments, too.

Also, bridgeThread() is a separate function to make guard clauses possible instead of nesting 3 more layers of IFs like we were fkin YandereDev.
Notably:
* Don't do the unmarshalling and switch-cases, as Cadence asked
* Revert command handler returns to how they were before, now that we're not using the returned-command-name anymore.
* use "" instead of „” to comply with English Language Standards Recommendations On Quotation Marks [TM], as per Cadence's request
* reflect current bot behavior (ie. it no longer bridges-as-replies, but mercilessly rips the message away from your caring arms)
* add Ellie-Mode
I was stripping the ping before because I thought it just pings the thread-author (which I found kinda pointless). But I didn't actually remove the code that figures out who to ping (because I happened to reuse the „if” around it, and didn't remove the setting itself because I didn't pay enough attention to it and just assumed it has some side-effects). I just tried to remove it finally (because my thought was „Wait, WHY are we setting m.mentions only to remove it?”), only to realize that the code does something entirely different (it pings the one under whose message a thread is about to be created, which makes a lot of sense tbh), and actually shouldn't be removed at all and - on the contrary - I should stop removing m.mentions (and also fix Ellie-Mode so that it won't prevent m.mentions from being set even if it's enabled).
I also noticed that my previous wiping code wasn't even doing anything at all. lmfao
Why did I make it this way???

Guzio/out-of-your-element#13
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-15 22:53:24 +00:00 
also, switched to working on this branch for now; I think that's the easiest option for the time being
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-15 23:43:34 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-16 00:02:26 +00:00 
🎵Give up free will forever - their voices won't be heard at all!🎶
🎶Display obedience...🎵

Where was I, again? Ah, right. I'm supposed to make the judgment call (I am the unenlightened masses) ((Someone tries to link their, fkin, smart-bidet smart-home-controller-room to a Stage or something and imma be cooked))
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-16 20:26:59 +00:00
Guzio added 2 commits 2026-04-16 21:27:41 +00:00 
Also, while at it, let the users know that /thread usage is a possibility in Forums.
Guzio added 4 commits 2026-04-17 17:04:04 +00:00 
The code is always greener in the other file, or something
turns out my handling of it from yesterday was still broken
Guzio added 2 commits 2026-04-17 18:02:56 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-17 18:47:33 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-17 19:44:11 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-17 20:04:49 +00:00 
I'm 99% sure I need to do {...channel, flags:(channel.flags^DiscordTypes.ChannelFlags.RequireTag)} but TypeScript won't let me
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-17 21:27:52 +00:00 
2 caveats remain (and neither has anything to do with not passing ...channel):
* ugly-error with permissions (fixed)
* no auto-reset (maybe fixed??? - it's either because I DID pass channel (ironic) or because of no await, testing option 1 now)

Also, improved comment consistency
Guzio changed title from WIP: feature: Thread improvements, round 1 to WIP: feature: forums. 2026-04-17 21:41:31 +00:00
Guzio changed title from WIP: feature: forums. to WIP: feature: threads'n'forums 2026-04-17 21:41:49 +00:00
Guzio commented 2026-04-17 21:45:05 +00:00
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

I just managed to scope-creep my way into turning this from a „threads QoL” PR to a „forum support (and threads come naturally as part of this, ig)” PR...

I just managed to scope-creep my way into turning this from a „threads QoL” PR to a „forum support (and threads come naturally as part of this, ig)” PR...
Guzio added 2 commits 2026-04-17 22:11:28 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-17 22:30:54 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-17 22:40:21 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-22 12:19:30 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-22 12:28:25 +00:00 
thanks, I hate it
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-22 12:31:42 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-22 12:41:58 +00:00
Guzio added 2 commits 2026-04-22 14:03:01 +00:00
Guzio added 1 commit 2026-04-22 14:11:50 +00:00 
Apparently, the context["m.relates_to"] = {"m.in_reply_to": {event_id: event.event_id}} has always been there... The more you know!

I forgot I didn't, apparently, add it myself.

Also, while fixing the regression, I may as well introduce the note to EM, too.
This pull request is marked as a work in progress.
View command line instructions

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u mergable-fr-fr:Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git checkout Guzio-mergable-fr-fr

Merge

Merge the changes and update on Forgejo.

Warning: The "Autodetect manual merge" setting is not enabled for this repository, you will have to mark this pull request as manually merged afterwards.

git checkout main
git merge --no-ff Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git checkout Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git rebase main
git checkout main
git merge --ff-only Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git checkout Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git rebase main
git checkout main
git merge --no-ff Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git checkout main
git merge --squash Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git checkout main
git merge --ff-only Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git checkout main
git merge Guzio-mergable-fr-fr
git push origin main
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels   
backfill

properly integrated backfill feature performed on room creation

  
blocking

critical issue that blocks release of milestone

  
design needed

must prototype and discuss to find the best way forward - suggestions appreciated!

  
moderately approachable

moderate investigation, deduction, and adaptability required - or covers multiple areas of code

  
very approachable

low mental complexity, few concepts, focused scope, no investigation

  
web
No labels
backfill
blocking
design needed
moderately approachable
very approachable
web
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: cadence/out-of-your-element#74
No description provided.
Delete branch "Guzio/out-of-your-element:mergable-fr-fr"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?