wordpress-webmention
                                
                                 wordpress-webmention copied to clipboard
                                
                                    wordpress-webmention copied to clipboard
                            
                            
                            
                        Implement Avatar Store in Branch 5.X
The other was based on 4.X. Creating this pull to actually put it into 5.X for various reasons.
I opted to work on this off of Branch 5.X instead of 4.X because in the older code, we stored author url in a meta property. In the new webmention storage philosophy, we store it properly in author URL and stop trying to be backward compatible with pingbacks.
So, it's better to key things to the author URL, whatever it is, as that is what we consider to be their identity.
The code also now removes the gravatar caching code. Instead, it retrieves even the generic default avatars from gravatar and caches them per author url. It also rewrites the gravatar URLs to the default cache size.
@pfefferle The quality check is failing over md5 hashing. I could go to sha256, but it seemed overkill. Thoughts?
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
 
  0 Bugs
 0 Bugs
 
  0 Vulnerabilities
 0 Vulnerabilities
 
  0 Security Hotspots
 0 Security Hotspots
 
  4 Code Smells
 4 Code Smells
 No Coverage information
 No Coverage information
 0.0% Duplication
 0.0% Duplication
@pfefferle Do we want to try and update and merge this?
What do you think about decoupling the storing part from the main avatar class, like we did with the handlers? So that it is possible to add new storing classes, like a db store, a CDN store or...?
I think I am fine with that
Nice! So let's merge the open PRs then and then I will try to change the structure a bit (maybe add namespaces) to prepare different avatar stores?!?
Going to tackle refreshing this next as discussed for namespacing so we can merge it
Shouldn't we get comment Display ready first? To have the current feature set ready and to have the 5.0 ready to launch?
Shouldn't we get comment Display ready first? To have the current feature set ready and to have the 5.0 ready to launch?
Good point. I'll redo this one later. Just wanted to close out the PRs. But the display does have a higher priority.
@pfefferle I know you are leaning toward an external solution but would still like to pursue this even if it is off by default