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

[Feature] Allow listing of members across bridges #361

Closed
patcon opened this issue Feb 1, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

[Feature] Allow listing of members across bridges #361

patcon opened this issue Feb 1, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor

patcon commented Feb 1, 2018

I wonder whether we could create a shorthand for helping people find members across bridges.

An ephemeral slash command might work: (only seen by sending user)
https://api.slack.com/slash-commands

Feature as imagined is slack-specific, but need not be.

A Slack slash command is just an integration that would be set up in Slack UI to hit an endpoint -- it could run off a "hook", whose precedent was already set up rocketchat hook integration

Or does this this seem like scope creep? I could understand that perspective :)

@42wim
Copy link
Owner

42wim commented Feb 1, 2018

Related to #191
I want one solution for all bridges, probably will be by talking and sending commands to the bot

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Feb 1, 2018

Ok, I'm grateful that you see it as helpful too! Do you feel it's important that the command/response NOT be public when possible to avoid?

@Jaykul
Copy link

Jaykul commented May 19, 2018

If you wanted a list, it seems important it should PM you -- but checking to see if someone is "online" could still be really useful and not as spammy ...

!whois Jaykul
Found Jaykul on Discord (idle) and IRC as well as (here on) Slack

@patcon
Copy link
Contributor Author

patcon commented Nov 26, 2018

cc @valvin1 @guakamole (subscribers from other thread)

@qaisjp qaisjp mentioned this issue Jan 1, 2019
@42wim
Copy link
Owner

42wim commented May 19, 2019

Closed in favor of #191

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

3 participants