Oops, if you saved `SwfAsset` outside of modeling code, the `item` field would be empty, and so `item.body_specific?` wouldn't happen.
This would trigger when you even just report a broken image!
Now, we always run the SQL query to check for that flag.
Okay so, userlookup stuff hasn't worked in years, because it requires a login now.
But apparently, somewhere recently, the code inside our `neopets` gem started hard crashing, because of assumptions we made about the document we'd get back.
I'm not sure why it only recently started crashing? or if I'm even necessarily right about that?
But anyway, I'm just doing the easiest safest (🤞🏻) change possible: being more generous with the errors we swallow.
Test Plan:
Deploy and cross fingers.
Okay, fine, finally making this controllable from the db without requiring a deploy :P Setting this new field will cause `item.special_color` to return the corresponding color. This mainly affects what we show on the item page, and what colors we request for modeling on the homepage.
We recently flipped the switch for various hosts to force HTTPS, yay! This includes `neopia.openneo.net`.
However, I forgot to change the URL scheme in this file. This meant that the form submit from the homepage would go to `http://neopia.openneo.net/`, then redirect to `https://neopia.openneo.net/`, but only preserve the form data in certain browsers. This change should fix that!
Note: This probably breaks the dev environment, where we don't have a cert for `https://neopia.dev.openneo.net`. I'll fix that some other time!
Interestingly, these items *are* correctly detecting their special
color on the homepage for model progress. So, we *do* have the ability
to detect this. But I don't have good item data locally, so it would
be hard to test this, so I'm just gonna go with the cheap solution
again, sorry XP
In bfd825d, we refactored the "is item body-specific?" check. In the process, we dropped the check for the manual override flag, `explicitly_body_specific?`. Not sure if it was an accident or if I was just _so_ confident that it was gonna work :P In any case, re-add the check!
Okay, surprise, the bug was unrelated to Camo config (though I'm glad I cleaned
that up anyway :P). We now, at a low level, serve a placeholder image for item
thumbnail URL if, for some reason, we don't have a good thumbnail URL on hand.
One time I did a thing called Camo to try to get our HTTPS pages working,
because images.neopets.com not supporting HTTPS is crazy >_> I've diasbled it
these days, but it had debug behavior to append `?NO_CAMO_CONFIG` to all
proxied URLs when Camo was not configured.
When an item had no thumbnail URL for some reason (mall spider needs fixing,
maybe?), this caused Rails to try to map that empty string into the path
`/assets/?NO_CAMO_CONFIG`, which made Rails complain that it was trying to load
an asset that doesn't exist. This is probably a sign that using `image_tag` for
URLs that *should* be external URLs, but aren't strictly *guaranteed* to be, is
unwise - but, for now, I've just disabled that behavior. I hope Rails has a
better escape hatch for the empty string :P
Ooh, this one was nasty, and only one symptom ever got noticed:
1. Pick "Occupies: Collar" in Advanced Search.
You get the text query "occupies:necklace".
2. And, if you try to do "occupies:collar" even in text-based search,
you *also* get the results from "occupies:necklace" mixed in with
the correct results.
The trick is that, in Spanish, zone 24 (necklace) is named "collar",
as is zone 27 (collar). Not sure what to do for Spanish, but this
issue also leaked into English: we really don't want English to return
results for Spanish-named zones.
This is a tricky problem, though, because it'd be nice for es users
to be able to type "occupies:hat". I think we'll have to do the quick
fix for now, though, and just only interpret the query in the current
locale.
Turns out ~22% of our users initially land on a trade list.
We like to keep the campaign off the pages where space is at a
premium, so we try to whitelist it to major landing pages in order
to avoid accidentally creating a bad experience on some page :)
I've been doing this manually via email for a long time,
since building new stuff in the logged-in world was a pain in the old env.
But now here we are! Finally, finally :)
The "fits:8-bit-chomby" search filter was being read as color=8, species=bit.
Now, we split from the right-hand side of the filter instead.
Still a problem for anyone who explicitly types the Spanish/Portuguese
ordering of "fits:chomby-8-bits", but I'm okay with this cheap fix, since
I bet literally nobody has done that in the past month, if ever :P
In particular, outfit_id == 0 would cause outfit_id? to
return false, so it wouldn't run the outfit presence
validation, so /donations/features would try to load
outfit #0 and fail.
Also, flash[:alert] instead of flash[:error] when outfit_id
is bad.
Mostly this was because of Mac's bug where you, in Firefox:
1. Load a real pet with the default appearance (probs Happy Male) into the wardrobe
2. Use a search query containing ":"
3. See the pet biology vanish before your eyes!
I observed that this only happened in cases where the biology stuff in the URL
wasn't replaced by a state number, so figured that it'd probably be good to do
that anyway because biology fields are annoying, and it for some reason seemed
to fix the bug. (Something to do with query parsing and stupid internal state
issues, probably. Ugh. One of these days, I'll re-rewrite all this :P)
Turns out we need to assign closeted to actual items, not
the item proxies, since that's what we check against. (I
would've thought they're backed by the same instance of
the item anyway, but, whatever. The fix works :P)
It turns out that some pets for seemingly nonstandard colors have the
standard body type anyway, and vice-versa. This implies that we should
stop relying on a color's standardness, but, for the time being, we've
just revised the prediction model:
Old model:
* If I see a body_id, I find the corresponding color_ids, and it's wearable
by all pet types with those color_ids.
New model:
* If I see a body_id,
* If it also belongs to a basic pet type, it's a standard body ID.
* It therefore fits all pet types of standard color (if there's
more than one body ID modeled already). (Not really,
because of weird exceptions like Orange Chia. Should that be
standard or not?)
* If it doesn't also belong to a basic pet type, it's a nonstandard
body ID.
* It therefore only belongs to one color, and therefore the item
fits all pet types of the same color.
