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

Discord new usernames #443

Open
alexolog opened this issue Jun 10, 2023 · 14 comments
Open

Discord new usernames #443

alexolog opened this issue Jun 10, 2023 · 14 comments

Comments

@alexolog
Copy link

Has anyone migrated to the new username yet?
Were there issues with Pidgin?

@LurkerHub
Copy link

Also interested to know.
The plugin seems to work with existing buddies that switched to the new ID, but I am hesitant to switch myself.

@aidaho
Copy link

aidaho commented Jun 14, 2023

Works fine for me.

@LurkerHub
Copy link

Thanks! Tried it and no apocalypse so far, log seems as clean as before the switch.

@alexolog
Copy link
Author

Thank you!

@chainria
Copy link

chainria commented Jun 26, 2023

Quite some of my friends already migrated, I didn't. The only thing I noticed was that Pidgin treats the new usernames as new accounts, the rename logic is not being triggered by this switch. So you got to clean up your contact list yourself. Maybe something worth investigating @EionRobb ?

Edit: Fix typo.

@alexolog
Copy link
Author

I rename manually

@chainria
Copy link

It seems I have an issue now. One of my contacts - and only one of them - has a split history between username#0 and username#0000 - curiously only username#0000 is on my contact list at all. username#0 seems to "siphon away" messages I send from the official client

@alexolog
Copy link
Author

Strange. Can you search for username in blist.xml and see if you have both?

@chainria
Copy link

Did search for it. Only one instance found: username#0000 - I don't know where username#0 starts coming from.

Plus, other accounts start to get affected now. username#0 is appearing at more and more username's. Haven't changed my own one yet. Maybe discord is punishing me for not doing as they want me to? :D

Will try to watch the debug log to spot any strange occurences.

@alexolog
Copy link
Author

I cannot recreate it. I tried sending messages from the native client to a new-name account, with Pidgin running and without, and it did not use any #0.

What I did notice is that messages exchanged while Pidgin was not running, were not fetched from history when I restarted Pidgin. But that's a separate bug.

@alexolog
Copy link
Author

I sometimes start Pidgin with debug log.

In Windows:

@echo off
set PURPLE_UNSAFE_DEBUG=1
set PURPLE_GNUTLS_DEBUG=1
set PURPLE_VERBOSE_DEBUG=1
"%ProgramFiles(x86)%\Pidgin\pidgin.exe" -d > "%APPDATA%\.purple\debug-%date%-%time::=.%.log" 2>&1

@chainria
Copy link

chainria commented Jul 3, 2023

Can't reproduce it either. Maybe it was some weird fluke. Tried everything I could the whole weekend. Simply not happening anymore. Maybe it was some weird A/B tests they did or something? I don't know.

@chainria
Copy link

I was able to reproduce it. And it really starts to annoy me. Basically every time you message someone not on your friend list, or freshly added, the conversations get split. When you message them from the official client, your own messages will be in username#0 but the replies will be in username#0000

@karxi
Copy link

karxi commented Jul 12, 2024

I was able to reproduce it. And it really starts to annoy me. Basically every time you message someone not on your friend list, or freshly added, the conversations get split. When you message them from the official client, your own messages will be in username#0 but the replies will be in username#0000

This is still the case, and remains supremely irritating. It also means that replies no longer show up, presumably because the buffers with your messages and those of others are separate.
Numerous times, a conversation is bifurcated—with the other individual's messages correctly under "username", but my outgoing ones stuck in "username#0". What's going on?

In addition to being inconvenient and annoying, this significantly reduces the accuracy of logs, which are a major part of why I use this plugin to begin with. Is there any chance for a fix?

EionRobb added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants