| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
| |
if theme_include() will not return anything. also add an empty zen.css file for the zen template
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
test
|
| |
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Add some beginning tests for bbcode, and a bit of refactoring
See merge request hubzilla/core!2110
|
| | |
|
|\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
include/dba: Make Dba driver transaction aware.
See merge request hubzilla/core!2108
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
This patch introduced database transaction support to the Dba driver via
the DbaTransaction class.
The goal of this is to allow the driver control over the creation and
finalization of database transactions.
Until now code that has needed transaction support has done so directly
by issuing "BEGIN", "ROLLBACK" and "COMMIT" commands to the underlying
database directly.
This has several disadvantages:
- We do have no control or knowledge of whether any transactions being
active.
- Since transactions can not be nested, we run the risk of unrelated
code trying to create a transaction when one is already active.
- Code using transactions are not testable, as the test runner wraps
all tests within a transaction to begin with.
This patch should eliminate all these problems.
A transaction is started by instantiating the DbaTransaction class:
$my_transaction = new \DbaTransaction();
The transaction will automatically be _rolled back_ if it has not been
committed before the instance is destroyed. (When the variable holding
it goes out of scope, i.e when the containing function returns.)
A transaction is committed like this:
$my_transaction->commit();
This will immediately commit the changes in the transaction, and the
transaction will be marked as committed, so it will not be attempted to
be rolled back on destruction.
I have chosen to "ignore" the problem of nested transactions by having
the DbaTransaction class _not_ initiate a new transaction if one is
already active. This also makes the rollback and commit actions of the
DbaTransaction class into no-ops.
An alternative would be to simulate nested transactions by using save
points if a transaction is already active. However, I'm unsure about
wether there's any safe way to avoid all potential pitfalls when doing
that.
In any case, nested transactions should preferably be avoided, and
afaict we don't rely on that in any of the existing code. The reason we
need to support it in some way is that it's needed for testing where the
code under test is creating a transaction on it's own. (Since each test
is run within a db transaction to begin with.)
Also, I have taken the liberty to assume a PDO based db driver for this
stuff. I don't think that's going to be a problem, as that's the only
thing supported by the rest of the code in any case.
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|/| |
|
| | |
|
|/ |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
masto did not parse correctly, fix typo when restoring temporary linebreaks and remove redundant codeline when converting span tags
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Moves the logic for unwrapping broken lines in html (and Markdown) to
the node processing, instead of doing it over the full html content.
This allows us to skip if for code blocks (aka `<code>` elements within
`<pre>` elements).
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
stream first) in source_xchan instead of owner_xchan. this way we will preserve the real owner for the thread and not have conflicts when dealing with deletes of comments or likes
|
| |
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Improve validate_email function
See merge request hubzilla/core!2088
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
The validate_email function relied on doing an actual domain lookup (on
supported platforms) to validate the domain of the email address. This
does not work too well in testing environments where we may not want to
spam the DNS system, if it at all is available.
Apart from the the function did very little to actually verify that it
was a valid email address.
This patch tries to change that by usng a somewhat stricted regex based
validation. While this may not be perfect, it should be good enough in
the vast majority of cases. For platforms where no validation was
performed with the old version, it will at least be an improvement.
Also, it allows testing without having an external network connection.
Also clarify the doc comment, that it does not actually try to resolve
the email address, just the domain.
|
|/ |
|
| |
|
| |
|