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

Disallow modifying the CategoryId for CategoryChannels #1282

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Chris-Johnston
Copy link
Collaborator

@Chris-Johnston Chris-Johnston commented Mar 13, 2019

This change fixes an issue that was introduced with the INestedChannel type ( #1004 ). Previously, it was possible to use ModifyAsync on a ChannelCategory to set it's CategoryId, since it was just using GuildChannelProperties. This is not supported by the API, and would probably do nothing.
This is a breaking change, however I can't imagine that anyone was trying to nest categories before this. I don't think that it should affect anyone. (Prove me wrong, I guess?)

This change adds the NestedChannelProperties and ModifyNestedChannelParams types, which follow the same class hierarchy as the public-facing channel entities. This allows only guild voice and text channels to modify the CategoryId property.

This change fixes an issue that was introduced with the INestedChannel type. Previously, it was possible to use ModifyAsync on a ChannelCategory to set it's CategoryId. This is not supported, and would probably error.
This is a breaking change, however I can't imagine that anyone was trying to nest categories before this. I don't think that it should affect anyone.

This change adds the NestedChannelProperties and ModifyNestedChannelParams types, which follow the same class hierarchy as the public-facing channel entities. This allows only guild voice and text channels to be placed under a category.
The change
setting a categoryid to 0 will result in a bad request, null will actually detach
@quinchs quinchs added this to the 4.0 milestone Apr 7, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants