Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@i0bs

i0bs/january-summary.md

Last active January 29, 2022 15:12
Show Gist options
  • Save i0bs/714d8202074d1ef2d0def19ecf4e44eb to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save i0bs/714d8202074d1ef2d0def19ecf4e44eb to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Download ZIP
DDevs Q&A Summary 28/01/2022
Raw
january-summary.md

DDevs Q&A January 2022 Summary - Happy New Year!

Forward

This is an nonexhaustive summary of the DDevs Q&A stage. Most of the points below are paraphrased for brevity. Emphasis is my own unless explicitly stated, and my opinions on certain things may shine through. Please refer to a VOD of the stage for the exact wording from the Discord Developers.

Upcoming Features (and demos if available)

  • Application Discovery
    • You need to add your application before the publication of application discovery adding a way for the bot to be invited through accepted means in the Developers Portal. (e.g. "Add to server" button.)
    • Developers are looking into an opt-in system for the discovery system. More information will be presented at a later date.
  • Application Commands Permissions v2.01
    • Integrations overlay
      • Generally modeled after how channel permissions work.
      • You can manually approve or deny permission per channel, role, or user.
      • Default guild member permissions will be added at a later date, where bot developers can set a singular or list of permissions to natively carry.
    • Command permission overlay
      • By default, a command will use the "base" inherited permissions. This should be interpreted much like syncing of permissions for channels.
      • Permissions can be modified to be entirely separate from the application, or "un-synced."
      • In the future, descriptions will be added to the overlay for the command.
    • View permissions with server role
      • This feature will respect the current permission state (synced or un-synced) with the command in question.
    • Slate slash command with permissions in effect
      • This can be limited to a selective range of channels/roles/users.
    • The current limit for permissions is 100 per application command.
  • 2022 roadmap
    • Application command permissions are going out well, initial testing stage.
    • Starting the beta testing period for the attachment application command option type.
    • General improvements to select menus.
      • Pre-populated information
      • Searchable + autocompletion
    • Possibility of adding a "date picker" as a new application command option type.
    • Working on a huge internal refactor for the Bot API.
      • Will allow better improvements for permissions, among other things.
  • Rich presence
    • There were feature requests accumulated over time; one of them being image requests.
    • Image URLs are now able to be sent as keys which will be proxied through their imaging system.
    • Preview of asset improvements
    • This change should be backwards compatible with the GameSDK, so there aren't any known issues thus far.

Answers + Other Interesting points

  • Subcommands with the new permission system.
    • This permission rework will not apply to subcommands specifically.
    • Permissions will only apply to the top-level command (for now).
    • There is a technical barrier preventing them from doing this right now, but it's acknowledged by the developers.
  • The new permission system's impact on the old one.
    • There will be backwards compatibility first, and later deprecation of the old system.
    • If you have both versions on your commands, the second version will overwrite the first one.
    • There's no ETA on the full transition movement.
    • The new permission system is "wanting to be tested as an experiment." (verbatim from Mason)
      • This is a test to see whether the new system will be a good compromise towards bot developers and server moderators or not.
      • If this system is not ready, they'll continue to make reflecting changes until they feel confident with the new changes.
  • "When will we see context menu app for mobile?"
    • This is something that is planned, but development cycles take priority.
    • "There are other to fish to fry, in the fishfry." - ian1 2022
    • The android work is an obstacle so far.
  • "Are there plans to specify in the 'Missing Permissions'/503/50013 error response in which permission has been determined to be missing?"
    • This is something that would be checked internally in their pathing layer per singular permission.
  • "Is there any movement on being able to send message components without needing content or embeds?"
    • This is something that they'll add to their list of things to work on at some point.
  • "Are you guys planning on adding input fields and marquees?"
    • Yes, this is something being added.
    • They're looking at presenting a popup to a user that will present up to 5 text input fields to a user.
    • Beta for mobile should have started taking place not too long ago.
    • An open-ended input field while chat communication is ongoing seems like a poor UX approach.
  • "Is there any consideration to expand the HTTPS application endpoint implementaton to something on-par with the Gateway?"
    • They believe there are things that could be done to improve this, however, they're unsure if a strong outgoing HTTP request schema for webhook-esque requests would be something they want in the API.
  • "What is the status on mobile support for interactions?" (misc./gen question)
    • The first thing is that they're supported.
    • Users being unable to use slash commands fully on mobile sounds closely related to harm against their parser.
    • This is something they're willing to look more deeply into if this is a widespread occurance.
    • Bad internet connection/latency should be a consideration for interaction support.
    • Any reprod. android and/or slash command bugs should be reported to the GitHub repository for the Discord API docs.
  • "Any possibility of paginated modals/chaining them together?"
    • No plans to "chain" them together, but connected modals with some stepper system is something worthy of consideration.
  • "Will message edits ever be viable as interaction responses?"
    • As a response type, message edits are already supported among commands and components.
    • You should be able to continue PATCH calling the interaction response in question to edit it for up to 15 minutes.
  • "Will Discord provide tools for unverified bots to gain user growth?"
    • The existence of verification will always be a requirement for being found.
    • Verification is a strong way to ensure safety to users with data and privacy.
    • The criterion for verification should be reflected upon, and valued for what its purpose is intended for.
  • "Are you able to provide any ETA on the release of modals interaction responses?"
    • The main obstacle was android support for modals, preventing any sort of ETA whatsoever.
    • Once more testing has been completed, they'll be able to provide a clearer response to this question.
    • The feature design is progressing on all platforms so far.
  • "Will we see a revamp/replacement/overhaul of embeds in the future?"
    • There is an acknowledgement on the lack of cohesiveness between components and embedding.
    • In the "perfect" vision of the future, there's an imagined design of visual components instead of functional ones.
    • There is no imminent timeline of when this would theoretically come, but it's certainly something to add to the pipeline.
  • "Would there be any chance that select menus will either be able to be unselected, or reselect the already selected option?"
    • They can already be unselected when the min_values field is set to 0.
    • In terms of reselection, they recommend opening up a discussion on the GitHub repository on why you'd want to see that.
  • "When will we be able to change our bots' 'About Me' sections through the API?"
    • This will not be implemented as a feature for the Bot API due to other planned feature(s).
  • "Will we see the requirement of bots being public to apply for verification be removed?"
    • This is still being thought on. Developers acknowledge that this is an issue for bot developers.
    • Having a system where verification and bot growth are closely correlated, it appears counterintuitive to want to allow private bots to apply for verification.
  • "Will images be an allowed attribute in modals, similar to embeds having a thumbnail?"
    • Considered for the future.
  • "Would discord consider making autocomplete compatible with text_input for modals?"
    • Text inputs are intended to be freely designed by bot developers.
    • Because of it being openly useable, they don't have any current intentions to make this a feature.
    • If others want this, they recommend making a discussion post on the GitHub repository.
  • "Will interaction bots ever use their own role for permission?"
    • Maybe. Not all bots have a user associated with the interaction.
  • "Are there plans on introducing a GET Guild Count endpoint or schema field for HTTP-only bots?"
    • Probably not, there are no plans to introduce an endpoint that could be hit so constantly as something like this.

Previous Q&A Summaries

@NovaFox161
Copy link

Vod by Spiral
Alternate summary by myself

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