continuwuation/continuwuity
continuwuation/continuwuity
15
108
Fork 117
Code Issues 130 Pull requests 27 Releases 35 Packages 3 Activity Actions 2

Use the same helper for submitting state events on room creation and on state endpoint #1799

Open
eve wants to merge 1 commit from eve/ackduck:room_creation_events into main
pull from: eve/ackduck:room_creation_events
merge into: continuwuation:main
Conversation 7 Commits 1 Files changed 5 +388 -304
eve commented 2026-05-22 13:28:04 +00:00
Contributor
Copy link

On room creation, A list of initial state events may be provided that should be submitted to the room after creation. These events should be treated as any other state event and submitted to the same checks.

With this change, state events submitted on room creation will be submitted through the same helper as those through the usual endpoint.

The submission helper is moved to the timeline service to make it available everywhere. This will be useful for implementing #903.

This pull request...

Pull request checklist:

  • This pull request targets the main branch, and the branch is named something other than
    main.
  • I have written an appropriate pull request title and my description is clear.
  • I understand I am responsible for the contents of this pull request.
  • I have followed the contributing guidelines:
On room creation, A list of initial state events may be provided that should be submitted to the room after creation. These events should be treated as any other state event and submitted to the same checks. With this change, state events submitted on room creation will be submitted through the same helper as those through the usual endpoint. The submission helper is moved to the timeline service to make it available everywhere. This will be useful for implementing #903. <!-- In order to help reviewers know what your pull request does at a glance, you should ensure that 1. Your PR title is a short, single sentence describing what you changed 2. You have described in more detail what you have changed, why you have changed it, what the intended effect is, and why you think this will be beneficial to the project. If you have made any potentially strange/questionable design choices, but didn't feel they'd benefit from code comments, please don't mention them here - after opening your pull request, go to "files changed", and click on the "+" symbol in the line number gutter, and attach comments to the lines that you think would benefit from some clarification. --> This pull request... <!-- Example: This pull request allows us to warp through time and space ten times faster than before by double-inverting the warp drive with hyperheated jump fluid, both making the drive faster and more efficient. This resolves the common issue where we have to wait more than 10 milliseconds to engage, use, and disengage the warp drive when travelling between galaxies. --> <!-- Closes: #... --> <!-- Fixes: #... --> <!-- Uncomment the above line(s) if your pull request fixes an issue or closes another pull request by superseding it. Replace `#...` with the issue/pr number, such as `#123`. --> **Pull request checklist:** <!-- You need to complete these before your PR can be considered. If you aren't sure about some, feel free to ask for clarification in #dev:continuwuity.org. --> - [x] This pull request targets the `main` branch, and the branch is named something other than `main`. - [x] I have written an appropriate pull request title and my description is clear. - [x] I understand I am responsible for the contents of this pull request. - I have followed the [contributing guidelines][c1]: - [x] My contribution follows the [code style][c2], if applicable. - [x] I ran [pre-commit checks][c1pc] before opening/drafting this pull request. - [x] I have [tested my contribution][c1t] (or proof-read it for documentation-only changes) myself, if applicable. This includes ensuring code compiles. - [x] My commit messages follow the [commit message format][c1cm] and are descriptive. <!-- Notes on these requirements: - While not required, we encourage you to sign your commits with GPG or SSH to attest the authenticity of your changes. - While we allow LLM-assisted contributions, we do not appreciate contributions that are low quality, which is typical of machine-generated contributions that have not had a lot of love and care from a human. Please do not open a PR if all you have done is asked ChatGPT to tidy up the codebase with a +-100,000 diff. - In the case of code style violations, reviewers may leave review comments/change requests indicating what the ideal change would look like. For example, a reviewer may suggest you lower a log level, or use `match` instead of `if/else` etc. - In the case of code style violations, pre-commit check failures, minor things like typos/spelling errors, and in some cases commit format violations, reviewers may modify your branch directly, typically by making changes and adding a commit. Particularly in the latter case, a reviewer may rebase your commits to squash "spammy" ones (like "fix", "fix", "actually fix"), and reword commit messages that don't satisfy the format. - Pull requests MUST pass the `Checks` CI workflows to be capable of being merged. This can only be bypassed in exceptional circumstances. If your CI flakes, let us know in matrix:r/dev:continuwuity.org. - Pull requests have to be based on the latest `main` commit before being merged. If the main branch changes while you're making your changes, you should make sure you rebase on main before opening a PR. Your branch will be rebased on main before it is merged if it has fallen behind. - We typically only do fast-forward merges, so your entire commit log will be included. Once in main, it's difficult to get out cleanly, so put on your best dress, smile for the cameras! --> [c1]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md [c2]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/docs/development/code_style.mdx [c1pc]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#pre-commit-checks [c1t]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#running-tests-locally [c1cm]: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/branch/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#commit-messages
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from 420d2173e0
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Details
Auto Labeler / Apply labels based on changed files (pull_request_target) Successful in 31s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m31s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m17s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 9s
Details
to 210b7e95b7
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 8m47s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 9s
Details
2026-05-22 14:19:20 +00:00 Compare
nex 2026-05-25 17:29:51 +00:00
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from 210b7e95b7
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 8m47s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 9s
Details
to 6656a2b113
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 9s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m25s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 11m14s
Details
2026-05-27 17:05:47 +00:00 Compare
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from 6656a2b113
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 9s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m25s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 11m14s
Details
to 9cea8d2080
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 7s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Failing after 9s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 7s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
Details
2026-06-10 09:35:18 +00:00 Compare
nex requested changes 2026-06-24 21:43:18 +00:00
Dismissed
nex left a comment
Copy link

seems sensible, just some comments R.E. making some opportunistic style changes

seems sensible, just some comments R.E. making some opportunistic style changes
src/service/rooms/timeline/helpers.rs Outdated
@ -0,0 +20,4 @@
#[implement(super::Service)]
#[allow(clippy::too_many_arguments)]
pub async fn send_state_event_for_key_helper(
nex commented 2026-06-24 21:09:16 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

I think if you're attaching it to the service, _helper isn't necessary. send_state_event is shorter and probably more memorable imo

I think if you're attaching it to the service, `_helper` isn't necessary. `send_state_event` is shorter and probably more memorable imo
eve marked this conversation as resolved
src/service/rooms/timeline/helpers.rs Outdated
@ -0,0 +56,4 @@
}
#[implement(super::Service)]
async fn allowed_to_send_state_event(
nex commented 2026-06-24 21:10:14 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

I think this should be called assert_allowed_to_send_state_event, since its sole function is propagating an error if the change is forbidden

I think this should be called `assert_allowed_to_send_state_event`, since its sole function is propagating an error if the change is forbidden
eve marked this conversation as resolved
nex reviewed 2026-06-24 21:44:05 +00:00
src/service/rooms/timeline/helpers.rs Outdated
@ -0,0 +63,4 @@
state_key: &str,
json: &mut Raw<AnyStateEventContent>,
) -> Result {
match event_type {
nex commented 2026-06-24 21:44:05 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Forgejo forgot to include this comment apparently but I think it'd be a good idea to split these match arms into their own functions to make this function less complex cognitively

Forgejo forgot to include this comment apparently but I think it'd be a good idea to split these match arms into their own functions to make this function less complex cognitively
eve commented 2026-07-16 15:49:15 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

Would that be better ? Yeah it's a big match statement, but it's very intuitive to understand what it does. I feel like splitting it into functions would just make it more difficult to read the code by adding more indirection to the code, without really making it more clear than it already is.

Would that be better ? Yeah it's a big match statement, but it's very intuitive to understand what it does. I feel like splitting it into functions would just make it more difficult to read the code by adding more indirection to the code, without really making it more clear than it already is.
nex commented 2026-07-16 17:05:50 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

I disagree. I think maintaining the match arms but having them all point to functions is easier to follow, since there's clear(er) boundaries. This might just be my dyslexia influencing my preferences, but I find the match statement really hard to follow.
Something like this is what I (personally) prefer:

match event_type {
    | StateEventType::RoomCreate => {
                // This returns immediately so is simple enough to not warrant a function
                return Err!(Request(BadJson(debug_warn!(
                        %room_id,
                        "You cannot update m.room.create after a room has been created."
                ))));
        },
    | StateEventType::RoomServerAcl => assert_allowed_to_send_acl_state_event(...),  // Has a lot of if/elses in it, so a separate function is easier to follow
    | StateEventType::RoomEncryption =>
        // This one is simple enough too, like m.room.create
        // Forbid m.room.encryption if encryption is disabled
        if !self.services.config.allow_encryption {
                return Err!(Request(Forbidden(
                        "Encryption is disabled on this homeserver."
                )));
        },
    | StateEventType::RoomJoinRules => assert_allowed_to_send_acl_state_event(...),  // Has a lot of nested checks
// ...

I would also argue the simple arms should go into their own functions for style consistency but that'd be overly pedantic of me

I disagree. I think maintaining the match arms but having them all point to functions is easier to follow, since there's clear(er) boundaries. This might just be my dyslexia influencing my preferences, but I find the match statement really hard to follow. Something like this is what I (personally) prefer: ```rs match event_type { | StateEventType::RoomCreate => { // This returns immediately so is simple enough to not warrant a function return Err!(Request(BadJson(debug_warn!( %room_id, "You cannot update m.room.create after a room has been created." )))); }, | StateEventType::RoomServerAcl => assert_allowed_to_send_acl_state_event(...), // Has a lot of if/elses in it, so a separate function is easier to follow | StateEventType::RoomEncryption => // This one is simple enough too, like m.room.create // Forbid m.room.encryption if encryption is disabled if !self.services.config.allow_encryption { return Err!(Request(Forbidden( "Encryption is disabled on this homeserver." ))); }, | StateEventType::RoomJoinRules => assert_allowed_to_send_acl_state_event(...), // Has a lot of nested checks // ... ``` I would also argue the simple arms should go into their own functions for style consistency but that'd be overly pedantic of me
nex commented 2026-07-16 17:10:05 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

I feel like splitting it into functions would just make it more difficult to read the code by adding more indirection to the code

It's very easy to jump to function definitions, I don't think it makes it any more difficult.

without really making it more clear than it already is.

I tend to flatten the code when moving it into a function out of a match arm, preferring to return false explicitly whenever such a condition is encountered rather than nesting a bunch of statements. For example:

Lines 42 to 79 in 8195373
pub(super) fn verify_policy_signature(
via: &ServerName,
ps_key: &Base64<Standard, Vec<u8>>,
pdu_json: &CanonicalJsonObject,
redaction_rules: &RedactionRules,
) -> bool {
#[cfg(debug_assertions)]
{
let pretty = serde_json::to_string(pdu_json).unwrap();
trace!(data=%pretty, "Preparing to check policy server signature");
};
let Some(canonical_json) = redact(pdu_json.clone(), redaction_rules, None)
.ok()
.and_then(|r| to_canonical_object(r).ok())
else {
debug_warn!("Failed to redact event");
return false;
};
let Some(signature) = extract_signature(pdu_json, via, POLICY_SERVER_KEY_ID_ED25519) else {
debug!("No (valid) policy server signature present on event");
return false;
};
trace!(%signature, "Verifying policy server signature");
let Ok(canonical_str) = to_canonical_json_string_for_signing(&canonical_json) else {
debug_warn!("Could not convert canonical json object into string");
return false;
};
verify_canonical_json_bytes(
&SigningKeyAlgorithm::Ed25519,
ps_key.as_bytes(),
signature.as_bytes(),
canonical_str.as_bytes(),
)
.inspect_err(|e| debug_error!("Policy server verification failed: {e}"))
.is_ok()
}

This means the "happy path" is always as leftmost as possible and is generally easier to read.
Again though, "easy to read/follow" is subjective, and it's entirely plausible this is just an issue exclusive to me. If you disagree let me know and I'm happy to mark this as resolved

> I feel like splitting it into functions would just make it more difficult to read the code by adding more indirection to the code It's very easy to jump to function definitions, I don't think it makes it any more difficult. > without really making it more clear than it already is. I tend to flatten the code when moving it into a function out of a match arm, preferring to `return false` explicitly whenever such a condition is encountered rather than nesting a bunch of statements. For example: https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/src/commit/8195373d81c8a8ccd13dafcf02e42fe3d2e5e1fe/src/service/rooms/event_handler/policy_server.rs#L42-L79 This means the "happy path" is always as leftmost as possible and is generally easier to read. Again though, "easy to read/follow" is subjective, and it's entirely plausible this is just an issue exclusive to me. If you disagree let me know and I'm happy to mark this as resolved
eve commented 2026-07-16 20:04:43 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

Fair enough. I've split the match statement. You're right I do think it's more readable this way now that I look at it.

Fair enough. I've split the match statement. You're right I do think it's more readable this way now that I look at it.
nex marked this conversation as resolved
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from 9cea8d2080
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 7s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Failing after 9s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 7s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
Details
to 5e47223ab9
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 7s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m18s
Details
Update flake hashes / update-flake-hashes (pull_request) Successful in 1m11s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m19s
Details
Deploy Element Web / 🏗️ Build and Deploy (pull_request) Failing after 6m40s
Details
2026-07-16 15:46:41 +00:00 Compare
eve commented 2026-07-16 15:49:34 +00:00
Author
Contributor
Copy link

Finally getting back to this, sorry been busy.

Finally getting back to this, sorry been busy.
nex commented 2026-07-16 17:06:12 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

No worries!

No worries!
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from 5e47223ab9
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 7s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m18s
Details
Update flake hashes / update-flake-hashes (pull_request) Successful in 1m11s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m19s
Details
Deploy Element Web / 🏗️ Build and Deploy (pull_request) Failing after 6m40s
Details
to a73be5450d
Some checks failed
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 2m43s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 7s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m57s
Details
2026-07-16 20:03:26 +00:00 Compare
nex approved these changes 2026-07-17 13:01:15 +00:00
Aranjedeath commented 2026-07-17 14:01:49 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

can we get the clippy lints fixed ? looks good otherwise

can we get the clippy lints fixed ? looks good otherwise
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from a73be5450d
Some checks failed
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 2m43s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 7s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 5m57s
Details
to a72d318c1a
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 4m8s
Details
2026-07-17 15:39:54 +00:00 Compare
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from a72d318c1a
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m30s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 4m8s
Details
to eea0a79300
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m14s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 12m0s
Details
2026-07-17 17:08:59 +00:00 Compare
eve force-pushed room_creation_events from eea0a79300
All checks were successful
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 5s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m14s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Successful in 12m0s
Details
to 848da5be3b
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 4s
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Details
Update flake hashes / update-flake-hashes (pull_request) Successful in 1m17s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m23s
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 4m28s
Details
2026-07-19 14:43:02 +00:00 Compare
Some checks failed
Documentation / Build and Deploy Documentation (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
Checks / Prek / Check changed files (pull_request) Successful in 4s
Required
Details
Checks / Changelog / Check changelog is added (pull_request_target) Successful in 6s
Required
Details
Update flake hashes / update-flake-hashes (pull_request) Successful in 1m17s
Details
Checks / Prek / Pre-commit & Formatting (pull_request) Successful in 1m23s
Required
Details
Checks / Prek / Clippy and Cargo Tests (pull_request) Failing after 4m28s
Required
Details
This pull request is blocked because it's outdated.
This branch is out-of-date with the base branch
You are not authorized to merge this pull request.
View command line instructions

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u room_creation_events:eve-room_creation_events
git switch eve-room_creation_events
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
nex
Aranjedeath
Labels
Clear labels   
Abandoned
This pull request appears to be abandoned by its author.

  
Blocked
This pull request or issue is currently blocked from being merged/closed

  
Bug
Something isn't working as intended

  
Changelog
Added
 Changelog entry added

  
Changelog
Missing
 No changelog when one is needed

  
Changelog
None
 Changelog is unnecesary for this change

  
Cherry-picking
Commits picked from other conduit projects

  
Database
This requires or includes changes to the database

  
Dependencies
Something dependency related

  
Dependencies/Renovate
Automatic dependency upgrades by Renovate

  
Difficulty
Easy
 Low difficulty to implement - touches few parts of the codebase, low complexity

  
Difficulty
Hard
 High difficulty to implement - touches many parts of the codebase, high complexity

  
Difficulty
Medium
 Medium difficulty to implement - touches more parts of the codebase, higher complexity

  
Documentation
Improvements or additions to documentation

  
Enhancement
New feature or request

  
Good first issue
Good for newcomers

  
Help wanted
Additional eyes and keyboards are required for this one

  
Inherited
Issues that have been inhereted from the project pre-fork

  
Matrix/Administration
Features pertaining to homeserver administration

  
Matrix/Appservices
Features pertaining to the appservice API

  
Matrix/Auth
Features pertaining to authentication

  
Matrix/Client
Features pertaining to client-to-server interactions

  
Matrix/Core
Issues relating to core matrix functionality, such as state resolution and PDU formats

  
Matrix/E2EE
Issues related to end to end encryption

  
Matrix/Federation
Features pertaining to server-to-server interactions

  
Matrix/Hydra
Issues related to room version 12 and related changes (temporary label)

  
Matrix/MSC
Features pertaining to unstable matrix features

  
Matrix/Media
Features pertaining to media interactions

  
Matrix/T&S
Changes or issues related to trust & safety tooling

  
Merge
This PR is ready to be merged

  
Merge/Manual
This PR should be manually merged

  
Merge/Squash
This PR should be squashed when it is merged

  
Meta
Related to housekeeping, maintenance, or other repo-meta.

  
Meta/CI
Issues related to CI changes

  
Meta/Packaging
Packaging

  
Priority
Blocking
 This issue is blocking the next release

  
Priority
High
 This issue is very important

  
Priority
Low
 This issue is of a rather low priority

  
Security
This item is related to general security

  
Status
Confirmed
 This issue has enough information and is confirmed

  
Status
Duplicate
 This issue or pull request already exists

  
Status
Invalid
 This issue doesn't seem right

  
Status
Needs Investigation
 This issue needs further investigation

  
Support
Questions or support requests

  
bob the builder
pdu logic rewrite starring nexus nicholson

No labels
Abandoned
Blocked
Bug
Changelog
Added
Changelog
Missing
Changelog
None
Cherry-picking
Database
Dependencies
Dependencies/Renovate
Difficulty
Easy
Difficulty
Hard
Difficulty
Medium
Documentation
Enhancement
Good first issue
Help wanted
Inherited
Matrix/Administration
Matrix/Appservices
Matrix/Auth
Matrix/Client
Matrix/Core
Matrix/E2EE
Matrix/Federation
Matrix/Hydra
Matrix/MSC
Matrix/Media
Matrix/T&S
Merge
Merge/Manual
Merge/Squash
Meta
Meta/CI
Meta/Packaging
Priority
Blocking
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Security
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Invalid
Status
Needs Investigation
Support
bob the builder
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
3 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
continuwuation/continuwuity!1799
No description provided.