modulatingforce/forcebot_rs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 33 Pull requests 11 Projects 2 Activity

Custom this BotCommand #48

Merged
modulatingforce merged 12 commits from say-this-guy into master 2024-04-09 15:49:58 -04:00
Conversation 8 Commits 12 Files changed 4 +67 -6
modulatingforce commented 2024-03-27 17:45:16 -04:00
Owner
Copy link

this would issue a fun notification back in the reply

For example :

  • "Got it! looking into their biometrics now HACKERMAN"
  • "SUS I see"
  • "Hmm"
  • "Reposting that to twitter rn"

In the future, maybe it could be enhanced to do other things or have additional enhanced logic

At Custom Module Level, use the Chat module functions mentioned here to say in reply to chat

#43 (comment)

Functional Use Case - Twitch Chatter

  1. As a Twitch Chatter, if I have any required roles of a given BotCommand, I can run that BotCommand
  2. I reply to a message in Chat with <botprefix>this . For example <botprefix>this fking guy ICANT
  3. The bot Responds to my message or the original message with a Fun Response

Code Difficulty

Low Difficulty and Relatively Small Code Change

However, delegating has it's advantages :

  1. Others will use this as a hands on Rust Learning Experience
  2. Hands on with Bot Code

Plan of Action :

  • Create a new Custom Module
    • Create a BotCommand called this
    • Create an Execution Body for the BotCommand . Logic should include checking if what was responded to was a reply
    • Use Chat module to Send messages to users or elsehwere #43
      • In this case, we're likely dealing with say_in_reply_to() so responds to the user
  • Unit Tests? Only if there's any advanced logic done so not required
`this` would issue a fun notification back in the reply For example : - "Got it! looking into their biometrics now HACKERMAN" - "SUS I see" - "Hmm" - "Reposting that to twitter rn" In the future, maybe it could be enhanced to do other things or have additional enhanced logic At Custom Module Level, use the `Chat` module functions mentioned here to say in reply to chat https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/pulls/43#issuecomment-730 --- # Functional Use Case - Twitch Chatter 1. As a Twitch Chatter, if I have any required roles of a given `BotCommand`, I can run that `BotCommand` 2. I reply to a message in Chat with `<botprefix>this` . For example `<botprefix>this fking guy ICANT` 3. The bot Responds to my message or the original message with a Fun Response --- # Code Difficulty Low Difficulty and Relatively Small Code Change However, delegating has it's advantages : 1. Others will use this as a hands on Rust Learning Experience 2. Hands on with Bot Code --- # Plan of Action : - [x] Create a new Custom Module - [x] Create a `BotCommand` called `this` - [x] Create an Execution Body for the `BotCommand` . Logic should include checking if what was responded to was a reply - [x] Use `Chat` module to Send messages to users or elsehwere https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/pulls/43 - In this case, we're likely dealing with `say_in_reply_to()` so responds to the user - [x] Unit Tests? Only if there's any advanced logic done so not required
modulatingforce added the
Kind/Enhancement
Bot_Code
Custom
 labels 2024-03-27 17:47:12 -04:00
modulatingforce added the
Complexity
Basic
 label 2024-03-27 18:21:24 -04:00
modulatingforce added the
Priority
Low
 label 2024-03-27 18:24:26 -04:00
modulatingforce added this to the Rust Learning project 2024-03-27 18:24:41 -04:00
modulatingforce modified the project from Rust Learning to Forcebot Prototype 1.0 Push 2024-03-27 18:27:02 -04:00
modulatingforce added the
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Review & Planning
 label 2024-03-27 19:58:39 -04:00
modulatingforce commented 2024-03-28 10:23:22 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Just in case if helpful

  1. When creating an fn execution body, ensure it's defined similar to the following , with just one argument : an ExecBodyParams
async fn foo(params : ExecBodyParams)

Working Custom Module Example
https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/custom/experimental/experiment001.rs#L100

  1. Within the body itself, if you want to access parts of the members, simply call the argument. Example below is accessing msg from params
if params.msg.sender.name.to_lowercase() == "ModulatingForce".to_lowercase()

Working Custom Module Example
https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/custom/experimental/experiment001.rs#L106-L107

  1. The data that can be pulled from params are defined in the ExecBodyParams type
#[derive(Clone)]
pub struct ExecBodyParams {
    pub bot : BotAR,
    pub msg : PrivmsgMessage,
    pub parent_act : ActAR , 
}

Source Definition
https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/core/bot_actions.rs#L15-L19

Just in case if helpful 1. When creating an fn execution body, ensure it's defined similar to the following , with just one argument : an ExecBodyParams ``` async fn foo(params : ExecBodyParams) ``` Working Custom Module Example https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/custom/experimental/experiment001.rs#L100 2. Within the body itself, if you want to access parts of the members, simply call the argument. Example below is accessing msg from params ``` if params.msg.sender.name.to_lowercase() == "ModulatingForce".to_lowercase() ``` Working Custom Module Example https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/custom/experimental/experiment001.rs#L106-L107 3. The data that can be pulled from params are defined in the ExecBodyParams type ```rust #[derive(Clone)] pub struct ExecBodyParams { pub bot : BotAR, pub msg : PrivmsgMessage, pub parent_act : ActAR , } ``` Source Definition https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/core/bot_actions.rs#L15-L19
HaruYuumei added 1 commit 2024-03-28 14:39:20 -04:00
new module test
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
95a9962721 
trying to add a new module
modulatingforce commented 2024-03-28 15:57:58 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

I believe I got it to work on a local . Without pushing, see if these recommendations help. This will also help future documentation

LULE I could push what I have, but let's see if you could get it to work also . You pretty much had what you needed, just in the wrong places to load

Code Recommendation

  1. In custom.rs , add the following
mod thisguy
// ...
thisguy::init(mgr).await;

a. NOTE - if you have borrowing issues, you can clone() the Arc for one of the values earlier like so

experimental::init(mgr.clone()).await;
thisguy::init(mgr).await;

  1. Move the thisguy.rs file into the custom folder

  2. Remove the other stuff that was added before

  • modules.rs & modules folder

Additional Information

1. Core Implementation on Loading Modules

Note : This is not critical to know when creating custom modules are loaded

In Core , when the ModulesManager is first constructed, it calls the Fixed paths for custom.rs & core.rs (below)

https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/say-this-guy/src/core/botmodules.rs#L612-L617

So when defining new modules ensure they are references in either of those points - more than likely custom.rs

For example, below is loading the experimental module

https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/say-this-guy/src/custom.rs#L15

https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/say-this-guy/src/custom.rs#L24

2. Modules loaded are logged

Logs show just after the above process what has been loaded into the bot from commands from main. You'll see log entries similar to the following

["Now=2024-03-28T15:45:32-0400&Pid=20224&Thr=ThreadId(1)&Seq=31"]
Trace = 'Reading bot actions'
Channel = 'None'
Chatter = 'None'
Code_Module = 'Some("main()")'



["Now=2024-03-28T15:44:44-0400&Pid=18904&Thr=ThreadId(1)&Seq=32"]
Info = 'bot actions > Command : enable'
Channel = 'None'
Chatter = 'None'
Code_Module = 'Some("main()")'
I believe I got it to work on a local . Without pushing, see if these recommendations help. This will also help future documentation LULE I could push what I have, but let's see if you could get it to work also . You pretty much had what you needed, just in the wrong places to load # Code Recommendation 1. In `custom.rs` , add the following ``` mod thisguy // ... thisguy::init(mgr).await; ``` a. NOTE - if you have borrowing issues, you can clone() the Arc for one of the values earlier like so ``` experimental::init(mgr.clone()).await; thisguy::init(mgr).await; ``` 2. Move the `thisguy.rs` file into the custom folder 3. Remove the other stuff that was added before - modules.rs & modules folder --- # Additional Information ## 1. Core Implementation on Loading Modules _Note :_ This is not critical to know when creating custom modules are loaded ### In Core , when the ModulesManager is first constructed, it calls the Fixed paths for custom.rs & core.rs (below) https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/say-this-guy/src/core/botmodules.rs#L612-L617 ### So when defining new modules ensure they are references in either of those points - more than likely custom.rs For example, below is loading the experimental module https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/say-this-guy/src/custom.rs#L15 https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/say-this-guy/src/custom.rs#L24 ## 2. Modules loaded are logged Logs show just after the above process what has been loaded into the bot from commands from main. You'll see log entries similar to the following ``` ["Now=2024-03-28T15:45:32-0400&Pid=20224&Thr=ThreadId(1)&Seq=31"] Trace = 'Reading bot actions' Channel = 'None' Chatter = 'None' Code_Module = 'Some("main()")' ["Now=2024-03-28T15:44:44-0400&Pid=18904&Thr=ThreadId(1)&Seq=32"] Info = 'bot actions > Command : enable' Channel = 'None' Chatter = 'None' Code_Module = 'Some("main()")' ```
HaruYuumei added 1 commit 2024-03-28 17:50:39 -04:00
custom module update
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
f8de595290
modulatingforce added 1 commit 2024-03-28 17:55:02 -04:00
Merge branch 'main' into say-this-guy
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
3ec51d66e5
HaruYuumei added 2 commits 2024-03-28 18:35:52 -04:00
Merge branch 'say-this-guy' of ssh://git.flake.sh:2222/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs into say-this-guy
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
a6ae5b3c47
HaruYuumei was assigned by modulatingforce 2024-03-28 19:20:53 -04:00
modulatingforce commented 2024-03-28 19:35:07 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

This may be helpful :

  • In Main , I experimented with the following in a custom button sayout that checks for messages that are considered replies .

Below sample is taking the reply body

https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/custom/experimental/experiment002.rs#L72-L75

    let reply_parent = if let Some(Some(reply)) = params.msg.source.tags.0.get("reply-parent-msg-body") {
            Some(reply)
        } else { None }
    ;
This may be helpful : - In Main , I experimented with the following in a custom button `sayout` that checks for messages that are considered replies . Below sample is taking the reply body https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/src/branch/main/src/custom/experimental/experiment002.rs#L72-L75 ```rust let reply_parent = if let Some(Some(reply)) = params.msg.source.tags.0.get("reply-parent-msg-body") { Some(reply) } else { None } ; ```
modulatingforce added a new dependency 2024-03-29 11:09:00 -04:00
#52 Retrieve Reply information from `ExecBodyParams`
modulatingforce added the
Status
Blocked
 label 2024-03-29 11:09:41 -04:00
modulatingforce commented 2024-03-29 11:10:54 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link
  • PR for ExecParams reply feature will be introduced first - #52
- [x] PR for ExecParams reply feature will be introduced first - https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/pulls/52
modulatingforce self-assigned this 2024-03-30 16:59:46 -04:00
modulatingforce added the
Ownership
Collab with Leads
 label 2024-03-31 09:52:59 -04:00
HaruYuumei added 2 commits 2024-04-02 19:11:51 -04:00
Thisguy working partially
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
d972eb7726 
not fully implemented reply to the reply
HaruYuumei added 2 commits 2024-04-03 09:26:31 -04:00
Rewriten the code
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
b43d6f8159 
working with command instead listener
modulatingforce commented 2024-04-03 20:40:40 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Hi @HaruYuumei

As discussed, #52 has been merged into master

To update the branch on this PR, please

  • Update Branch By Merge

** You can do this directly on this forge

Just FYI, doing this (from this Feature Branch, Update Branch by Merge), it will take the changes from Main/Master and add them onto this Feature Branch without changing either branch's commit history

The above is generally the most common way unless you're looking to reorganize / cleanup commit history . It generally also does not have issues

As a comparison, if you Update Branch by Rebase, you're changing the history of the feature branch by having all main/master branch be applied first before feature branch commits

For more information : https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing

Generally, when Updating your feature set, I would say :

  1. Use the Update Branch by Merge Option

  2. If there are issues merging (e.g., merge conflict), we can address this afterwards, possibly by :

a. attempting the same merge locally (with Feature checked out, merge master into feature), and resolving the merge conflicts

OR

b. attempting to Update Branch by Rebase (try the forge first ; but if the forge also finds conflicts, try to do the rebase locally, and resolve the conflicts)

When there's a merge conflict, the source files will be in a state where you can pick which changes are in conflict by deleting the unwanted change between the two > and then stage & commit that resolving merge conflict as a normal commit

More information :

https://www.simplilearn.com/tutorials/git-tutorial/merge-conflicts-in-git

Hope that helps!

Hi @HaruYuumei As discussed, https://git.flake.sh/modulatingforce/forcebot_rs/pulls/52 has been merged into master **To update the branch on this PR, please** - Update Branch By Merge ** You can do this directly on this forge Just FYI, doing this (from this Feature Branch, Update Branch by Merge), it will take the changes from Main/Master and add them onto this Feature Branch without changing either branch's commit history The above is generally the most common way unless you're looking to reorganize / cleanup commit history . It generally also does not have issues As a comparison, if you Update Branch by Rebase, you're changing the history of the feature branch by having all main/master branch be applied first before feature branch commits For more information : https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing --- Generally, when Updating your feature set, I would say : 1. Use the Update Branch by Merge Option 2. If there are issues merging (e.g., merge conflict), we can address this afterwards, possibly by : a. attempting the same merge locally (with Feature checked out, merge master into feature), and resolving the merge conflicts OR b. attempting to Update Branch by Rebase (try the forge first ; but if the forge also finds conflicts, try to do the rebase locally, and resolve the conflicts) --- When there's a merge conflict, the source files will be in a state where you can pick which changes are in conflict by deleting the unwanted change between the two > and then stage & commit that resolving merge conflict as a normal commit More information : https://www.simplilearn.com/tutorials/git-tutorial/merge-conflicts-in-git Hope that helps!
modulatingforce removed the
Status
Blocked
 label 2024-04-03 20:40:52 -04:00
modulatingforce commented 2024-04-09 14:02:28 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Haru going to try the above at some point today

If there are issues, we'll troubleshoot those issues on this branch and use whatever we learn for merges needed for textmods

Haru going to try the above at some point today If there are issues, we'll troubleshoot those issues on this branch and use whatever we learn for merges needed for textmods
HaruYuumei added 1 commit 2024-04-09 14:45:30 -04:00
Merge branch 'master' into say-this-guy
Some checks failed
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline failed
Details
93768de4dc
modulatingforce reviewed 2024-04-09 15:02:35 -04:00
modulatingforce left a comment
Author
Owner
Copy link

Hi @HaruYuumei

Could you try this locally? Pull this branch down - you should also get a compile error when cargo build . Afterwards, try the suggestion to make sure it builds

Afterwards, push up

Hi @HaruYuumei Could you try this locally? Pull this branch down - you should also get a compile error when `cargo build` . Afterwards, try the suggestion to make sure it builds Afterwards, push up
src/custom/thisguy.rs
@ -0,0 +34,4 @@
botlock
.botmgrs
.chat
.say_in_reply_to(&params.msg, a, params.clone())
modulatingforce commented 2024-04-09 15:01:49 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

We're getting an error here in ci/cd

error[E0061]: this method takes 4 arguments but 3 arguments were supplied
   --> src\custom\thisguy.rs:37:10
    |
37  |         .say_in_reply_to(&params.msg, a, params.clone())
    |          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ -----------     -------------- an argument of type `std::string::String` is missing
    |                          |
    |                          expected `Channel`, found `&PrivmsgMessage`
    |
note: method defined here
   --> src\core\chat.rs:415:18
    |
415 |     pub async fn say_in_reply_to(
    |                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
416 |         &self,
417 |         destination_channel : Channel ,
    |         -----------------------------
418 |         reply_message_id : String ,
    |         -------------------------
419 |         outmsg: String ,
    |         --------------
420 |         params : ExecBodyParams)
    |         -----------------------
help: provide the argument
    |
37  |         .say_in_reply_to(/* core::botinstance::Channel */, a, /* std::string::String */, params.clone())
    |                         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Recommend this be adjusted to

.say_in_reply_to(&params.msg.channel_login(), &params.msg.message_id(),a, params.clone())
We're getting an error here in ci/cd ``` error[E0061]: this method takes 4 arguments but 3 arguments were supplied --> src\custom\thisguy.rs:37:10 | 37 | .say_in_reply_to(&params.msg, a, params.clone()) | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ----------- -------------- an argument of type `std::string::String` is missing | | | expected `Channel`, found `&PrivmsgMessage` | note: method defined here --> src\core\chat.rs:415:18 | 415 | pub async fn say_in_reply_to( | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 416 | &self, 417 | destination_channel : Channel , | ----------------------------- 418 | reply_message_id : String , | ------------------------- 419 | outmsg: String , | -------------- 420 | params : ExecBodyParams) | ----------------------- help: provide the argument | 37 | .say_in_reply_to(/* core::botinstance::Channel */, a, /* std::string::String */, params.clone()) | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ``` --- Recommend this be adjusted to ```rust .say_in_reply_to(&params.msg.channel_login(), &params.msg.message_id(),a, params.clone()) ```
modulatingforce marked this conversation as resolved
HaruYuumei added 1 commit 2024-04-09 15:22:30 -04:00
changed reply message on thisguy
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
55aeaa7fc1
modulatingforce reviewed 2024-04-09 15:40:06 -04:00
modulatingforce left a comment
Author
Owner
Copy link

@HaruYuumei could you review and address the warnings first? Thank you!

@HaruYuumei could you review and address the warnings first? Thank you!
src/custom/thisguy.rs Outdated
@ -0,0 +57,4 @@
Broadcaster
],
}
.add_to_modmgr(Arc::clone(&mgr))
modulatingforce commented 2024-04-09 15:39:45 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

@HaruYuumei CI/CD is throwing a warning for this line

To improve our coding, CI/CD is set to a relatively strict level - the following:

cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features

Could you run that locally? Read through the errors that are returned - these lints usually have links to sites that help explain what might be best and why

Take your time on this though if required!

@HaruYuumei CI/CD is throwing a warning for this line To improve our coding, CI/CD is set to a relatively strict level - the following: ``` cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features ``` Could you run that locally? Read through the errors that are returned - these lints usually have links to sites that help explain what might be best and why Take your time on this though if required!
modulatingforce marked this conversation as resolved
HaruYuumei added 1 commit 2024-04-09 15:45:17 -04:00
warning changed
All checks were successful
ci/woodpecker/pr/cargo-checks Pipeline was successful
Details
e41f7b0524
HaruYuumei commented 2024-04-09 15:46:17 -04:00
Collaborator
Copy link

looks like it was a reference that was not actually needed should be alright now 😄

looks like it was a reference that was not actually needed should be alright now 😄
👍 1
modulatingforce commented 2024-04-09 15:48:47 -04:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

CI/CD looks good

Approving

CI/CD looks good Approving
modulatingforce changed title from WIP: Custom `this` BotCommand to Custom `this` BotCommand 2024-04-09 15:48:51 -04:00
modulatingforce added
Phase 5.0
Resolution > Completed
 and removed
Phase 2.0
Design > Research & Analysis
 labels 2024-04-09 15:49:38 -04:00
modulatingforce merged commit e1021c269d into master 2024-04-09 15:49:58 -04:00
modulatingforce deleted branch say-this-guy 2024-04-09 15:49:58 -04:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels   
Automated
  
Backlog
Post_Prototype_1.0

  
Bot_Code
Core

  
Bot_Code
Custom

  
CI/CD
  
Complexity
Advanced

  
Complexity
Basic

  
Complexity
Expert

  
Complexity
Intermediate

  
Kind/Breaking

Breaking change that won't be backward compatible

  
Kind/Bug

Something is not working

  
Kind/Bug Fix

Branches intended to address an existing Bug

  
Kind/Documentation

Documentation changes

  
Kind/Enhancement

Improve existing functionality

  
Kind/Feature

New functionality

  
Kind/Security

This is security issue

  
Kind/Testing

Issue or pull request related to testing

  
Nix
  
Ownership
Collab

  
Ownership
Collab with Leads
Collab with one or more Leads

  
Ownership
Individual Lead

  
Ownership
In-Review
Ownership may be in a review or disputed status

  
Ownership
Needs Owner > May Delegate
Tasks that may need reassignment

  
Ownership
Workshop with Leads
Workshop Tasks

  
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Drafting

  
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Researching

  
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Review & Planning

  
Phase 2.0
Design > Research & Analysis

  
Phase 3.0
Coding > Implementation

  
Phase 4.0
QA > Unit Testing & Design

  
Phase 5.0
Resolution > Completed

  
Phase 5.0
Resolution > Review for Completion

  
Priority
Critical
The priority is critical

  
Priority
High
The priority is high

  
Priority
Low
The priority is low

  
Priority
Medium
The priority is medium

  
Reviewed
Confirmed
Issue has been confirmed

  
Reviewed
Duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists

  
Reviewed
Invalid
Invalid issue

  
Reviewed
Won't Fix
This issue won't be fixed

  
Status
Abandoned
Somebody has started to work on this but abandoned work

  
Status
Blocked
Something is blocking this issue or pull request

  
Status
Need More Info
Feedback is required to reproduce issue or to continue work

No labels
Automated
Backlog
Post_Prototype_1.0
Bot_Code
Core
Bot_Code
Custom
CI/CD
Complexity
Advanced
Complexity
Basic
Complexity
Expert
Complexity
Intermediate
Kind/Breaking
Kind/Bug
Kind/Bug Fix
Kind/Documentation
Kind/Enhancement
Kind/Feature
Kind/Security
Kind/Testing
Nix
Ownership
Collab
Ownership
Collab with Leads
Ownership
Individual Lead
Ownership
In-Review
Ownership
Needs Owner > May Delegate
Ownership
Workshop with Leads
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Drafting
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Researching
Phase 1.0
Requirements > Review & Planning
Phase 2.0
Design > Research & Analysis
Phase 3.0
Coding > Implementation
Phase 4.0
QA > Unit Testing & Design
Phase 5.0
Resolution > Completed
Phase 5.0
Resolution > Review for Completion
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Reviewed
Confirmed
Reviewed
Duplicate
Reviewed
Invalid
Reviewed
Won't Fix
Status
Abandoned
Status
Blocked
Status
Need More Info
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Forcebot Prototype 1.0 Push
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
modulatingforce
HaruYuumei
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.

Depends on
#52 Retrieve Reply information from `ExecBodyParams`
modulatingforce/forcebot_rs
Reference: modulatingforce/forcebot_rs#48
No description provided.
Delete branch "say-this-guy"

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?