* Keep the registration context
* Expose the context object for other components
* Ensure registration is only run once
Search providers are migrated for demonstration.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Wurst <christoph@winzerhof-wurst.at>
This will allow to do lazy registration here which should allow for
loading less (or at least only when needed!).
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
If we use the owners mount point this results in null. And then the rest
of the checks get called with null. Which doesn't work.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
This is not required and doesn't allow us to be properly lazy. On top of
it this doesnt allow us to cache the routes (since closures/objects
can't be cached).
This is the first small step into cleaning up the routing we have
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
OC::$WEBROOT can be empty in case if your nextcloud installation has no url prefix. This will result in an empty Location Header.
in other areas OC::$WEBROOT is always used together with an /
The old sharing mechanism isn't working anymore, because it was replaced by Share 2.0. Also it was nowhere used so this removes the code paths and reduces complexity.
Signed-off-by: Morris Jobke <hey@morrisjobke.de>
This is like what we have to DI and classes, but for callables.
The motivating factor is to get rid of *service locators* in the `boot`
method of apps as a new pattern is about to emerge where we have lots of
`query` calls on the app or server container in order to fetch some
services.
With this little helper it's possible to call another (public) method
and magically have everything injected.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Wurst <christoph@winzerhof-wurst.at>
In general it is good to set them to Lax. But also to give devs more
control over them is not a bad thing.
Helps with #21474
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
while this scan *should* never be triggered, it's good to have some failsafe to ensure
that the users home contents don't end up getting scanned in the root storage
Signed-off-by: Robin Appelman <robin@icewind.nl>
When "send password by Talk" was disabled in a mail share it was
possible to keep the same password as before, as it does not pose any
security issue (unlike keeping it when "send password by Talk" is
enabled, as in that case the password was already disclosed by mail).
However, if a mail share is updated but the password is not set again
only the hashed password will be available. In that case it would not
make sense to send the password by mail, so now the password must be
changed when disabling "send password by Talk".
Note that, even if explicitly setting the same password again along with
the "send password by Talk" property would work, this was also prevented
for simplicity.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When "send password by Talk" is enabled in a mail share a new password
must be also set. However, when the passwords of the original and the
new share were compared it was not taken into account that the original
password is now hashed, while the new one is not (unless no new password
was sent, in which case the password of the original share was set in
the new share by the controller, but that was already prevented due to
both passwords being literally the same), so it was possible to set the
same password again.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Roeland Jago Douma
Julius Härtl
Christoph Wurst
Roeland Jago Douma
Daniel Kesselberg
Robin Appelman
Holger Hees
Morris Jobke
Joas Schilling
Joas Schilling
blizzz
Christoph Wurst
Daniel Calviño Sánchez