Skip to content

docs: document incident actions #6396

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

docs: document incident actions #6396

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

Lulalaby
Copy link
Contributor

@Lulalaby Lulalaby commented Sep 1, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Waiting for #7098

@sebm253 sebm253 mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2023
Merged
3 tasks
DonovanDMC added a commit to OceanicJS/Oceanic that referenced this pull request Sep 3, 2023
@DonovanDMC
incident actions
dc8defc 
discord/discord-api-docs#6396
@seailz seailz mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2023
Closed
3 tasks
@Lulalaby Lulalaby marked this pull request as ready for review September 12, 2023 23:56
Lulalaby
Lulalaby commented Sep 19, 2023
View reviewed changes
valdotle
valdotle reviewed Sep 19, 2023
View reviewed changes
@sdanialraza sdanialraza mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2023
Merged
@Misha-133 Misha-133 mentioned this pull request Sep 29, 2023
Merged
@Soheab Soheab mentioned this pull request Sep 30, 2023
Merged
6 tasks
@Soheab
Copy link

Soheab commented Oct 1, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Does this fire any gateway event like GUILD_UPDATE when the actions change at any time? Doesn't seem like it.

@Soheab
Copy link

Soheab commented Oct 3, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Passing null to any of the fields disables all actions, is this intended?

Edit: when only one field is being set.

@Lulalaby
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lulalaby commented Oct 3, 2023

It wasn't the previous behavior at least

@jaw0r3k jaw0r3k mentioned this pull request Oct 29, 2023
Closed
@MinnDevelopment MinnDevelopment mentioned this pull request Oct 29, 2023
Merged
6 tasks
@seailz
Copy link
Contributor

seailz commented Dec 1, 2023

any update on this one?

@sdanialraza
Copy link
Contributor

There also seems to be dm_spam_detected_at and raid_detected_at fields, could you please document those as well?

@MCausc78 MCausc78 mentioned this pull request Jan 19, 2024
Merged
@bsian03 bsian03 mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2024
Open
55 tasks
@Lulalaby Lulalaby closed this Apr 25, 2024
@Lulalaby Lulalaby deleted the incident-actions branch April 25, 2024 10:47
@Lulalaby Lulalaby restored the incident-actions branch April 25, 2024 10:48
@Lulalaby Lulalaby reopened this Apr 25, 2024
@Lulalaby
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sdanialraza i added the fields to the documentation as well

@Lulalaby Lulalaby changed the title Document incident actions docs: document incident actions Apr 25, 2024
@JustinBeckwith JustinBeckwith self-requested a review May 27, 2024 02:23
@JustinBeckwith
Copy link
Contributor

Note for future me - this is currently flagged as private in our Open API spec, and I need to go figure out why.

@Lulalaby
Copy link
Contributor Author

yeah heard that. surprises me

@Jiralite Jiralite mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2024
Merged
@shiftinv shiftinv mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2024
Merged
8 tasks
@Lulalaby Lulalaby requested a review from a team as a code owner August 24, 2024 03:10
@Lulalaby
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lulalaby commented Aug 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

I'll have to redo the pr if #7098 is merged, something messed up

@Lulalaby Lulalaby force-pushed the incident-actions branch 2 times, most recently from aa76e54 to 21877c3 Compare August 24, 2024 03:26
valdotle
valdotle reviewed Sep 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@MinnDevelopment
Copy link
Contributor

Bumping since it has been over a year. Is anything still blocking this?

Lulalaby
Lulalaby commented Jan 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
hellsan631
hellsan631 approved these changes Jan 23, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@hellsan631 hellsan631 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm!

jamieeeeeeeee
jamieeeeeeeee approved these changes Jan 23, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jamieeeeeeeee jamieeeeeeeee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🍗 🍗 🍗

docs/resources/Guild.md
|------------------------|--------------------|----------------------------------------|
| invites_disabled_until | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when invites get enabled again |
| dms_disabled_until | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when direct messages get enabled again |
| dm_spam_detected_at? | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when the dm spam was detected at |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: i think we can remove the "at" at the end so that its just: "when the dm spam was detected"

docs/resources/Guild.md
| invites_disabled_until | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when invites get enabled again |
| dms_disabled_until | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when direct messages get enabled again |
| dm_spam_detected_at? | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when the dm spam was detected at |
| raid_detected_at? | ?ISO8601 timestamp | when the raid was detected at |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: i think we can remove the "at" at the end so that its just: "when the raid was detected"

docs/resources/Guild.md
| Field | Type | Description |
|-------------------------|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------|
| invites_disabled_until? | ?ISO8601 timestamp \* | when invites should be enabled again |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: "when invites will be enabled again"

docs/resources/Guild.md
| Field | Type | Description |
|-------------------------|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------|
| invites_disabled_until? | ?ISO8601 timestamp \* | when invites should be enabled again |
| dms_disabled_until? | ?ISO8601 timestamp \* | when direct messages should be enabled again |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: "when direct messages will be enabled again"

joshuaperline added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2025
@joshuaperline
forking document incident actions #6396
1ea02ad
@joshuaperline joshuaperline mentioned this pull request Jan 23, 2025
Merged
joshuaperline added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2025
@joshuaperline
forking document incident actions #6396 (#7360)
2e3cf2f 
* forking document incident actions #6396

* update should to will

* fix formatting table oops

* fix table again
@joshuaperline
Copy link
Contributor

closing in favor of #7360 (with all comments applied)

@Lulalaby Lulalaby deleted the incident-actions branch January 24, 2025 14:10
@colinloretz
Copy link
Contributor

@Lulalaby sorry your original commits got clobbered here! Thanks for adding this. Not everyone is used to working in this repo.

@Lulalaby
Copy link
Contributor Author

All fine 💞
For some reason github suddenly changed my accounts setting to "do not allow edits by maintainers", guess that was the core problem here.

mazylol pushed a commit to mazylol/discord-api-docs that referenced this pull request Jul 3, 2025
@joshuaperline @mazylol
forking document incident actions discord#6396 (discord#7360)
c111ec0 
* forking document incident actions discord#6396

* update should to will

* fix formatting table oops

* fix table again
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@hellsan631 hellsan631 hellsan631 approved these changes

@jamieeeeeeeee jamieeeeeeeee jamieeeeeeeee approved these changes

@JustinBeckwith JustinBeckwith Awaiting requested review from JustinBeckwith

+2 more reviewers

@nathanctech nathanctech nathanctech left review comments

@valdotle valdotle valdotle left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.