Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Security and privacy part 2 #3637

Draft
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Velin92
Copy link
Member

@Velin92 Velin92 commented Dec 18, 2024

WIP, requires some SDK API that are still in review

What is left to do:

  • - Handle the save actions in both the edit address screen and the security and privacy screen
  • - This may require some pairing with the SDK team, to understand what is the correct to call these APIs based on the codependent states of the view
  • - There might be some redesigns incoming regarding the room address part to handle admins from different HSs
  • - Unit tests

@Velin92 Velin92 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 18, 2024 10:31
@Velin92 Velin92 requested review from stefanceriu and removed request for a team December 18, 2024 10:31
@Velin92 Velin92 added the pr-wip for anything that isn't ready to ship and will be enabled at a later date label Dec 18, 2024
@Velin92 Velin92 marked this pull request as draft December 18, 2024 10:31
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 18, 2024

Warnings
⚠️ This pull request seems relatively large. Please consider splitting it into multiple smaller ones.
⚠️ You seem to have made changes to views. Please consider adding screenshots.

Generated by 🚫 Danger Swift against 6e84f51

Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 18, 2024

❌ We are unable to process any of the uploaded JUnit XML files. Please ensure your files are in the right format.

added also the preview tests
and improved handling of the access -> vsibility reaction. Also added a simple error handling for the public directory toggle
but is missing its full implementation
Copy link
Member

@stefanceriu stefanceriu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice! Let's see how this evolves rules wise

Comment on lines -45 to +64
let encryptionBinding = Binding<Bool>(get: {
let binding = Binding<Bool>(get: {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What was wrong with encryptionBinding? 😅

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

well it was a local variable in the scope, and the only binding so I thought having it named binding, was fine.

if let canonicalAlias = roomProxy.infoPublisher.value.canonicalAlias {
aliasLocalPart = canonicalAlias.dropFirst().split(separator: ":").first.flatMap(String.init) ?? ""
} else if let displayName = roomProxy.infoPublisher.value.displayName {
aliasLocalPart = roomAliasNameFromRoomDisplayName(roomName: displayName)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👌

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pr-wip for anything that isn't ready to ship and will be enabled at a later date
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants