The portion after StartAtomPubNewActivity would never be reached since
Favorite handles that activity through ActivityHandlerPlugin nowadays.
So I cleaned it up and followed a couple of paths, making stuff prettier.
will verify unknown aliases against old ones if the new identifies as a
previously recognized URI.
Steps:
1. Check the newly received URI. Who does it say it is?
2. Compare these alleged identities to our local database.
3. If we found any locally stored identities, ask it about its aliases.
4. Do any of the aliases from our known identity match the recently introduced one?
Currently we do _not_ update the ostatus_profile table with the new URI.
Use profile URL (not URI), like elsewhere.
Profile::getUri() doesn't actually do anything useful, here--
it does nothing unless a plugin (like OStatus) is already
able to resolve the Profile into a backend object (e.g.: an Ostatus_profile).
If we might not already have an Ostatus_profile for a given Profile,
then we need to use $profile->getUrl() and fetch the data from that URL.
Try this first; use activity:subject->atom:title only as a fallback.
The code that output activity:subject was removed 2013-10-08,
and it it was deprecated for years before that....
Bring common_path() back into harmony with common_local_url(),
which started doing this 2013-03-25.
Shouldn't need to spread "StatusNet::isHTTPS()" logic all over
wherever common_path() is called; just DTRT automatically instead.
This really should be a UUID or something else totally unexpected
but I figure that crc32 is good enough for now. The reason we keep
the main structure is because some third party scripts have begun
relying upon the tag URI format to parse out domain name, type etc.
This means we import the URI string from remote instances to track their
conversations and are able to stitch together replies in a single thread.
We might have to try to avoid collisions so noone remotely can predict
conversation URIs which we generate on our server, causing a DoS kind of
problem.
If we know the URI sent from the remote party, and we don't know the
notice it is replying to, we might still be able to put it in the same
conversation thread!
