Skip to content

Conversation

meisterT
Copy link
Member

@meisterT meisterT commented Sep 6, 2025

Previously, the following could happen:

  • team A requests a clarification, potentially including details the jury doesn't want to broadcast
  • the jury replies to everyone, removing the part from the question that they don't want to have broadcasted
  • team B views the reply from the jury, sees the whole clarification thread

Found while working on #3087

Previously, the following could happen:
- team A requests a clarification, potentially including details the
  jury doesn't want to broadcast
- the jury replies to everyone, removing the part from the question that
  they don't want to have broadcasted
- team B views the reply from the jury, sees the whole clarification
  thread

Found while working on DOMjudge#3087
Copy link
Member

@vmcj vmcj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Isn't the idea that we don't have threads so why are we displaying this?

@meisterT
Copy link
Member Author

meisterT commented Sep 8, 2025

Isn't the idea that we don't have threads so why are we displaying this?

We do have threads, in case they are accessible.

@meisterT meisterT added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 12, 2025
Merged via the queue into DOMjudge:main with commit 1e527a1 Sep 12, 2025
36 checks passed
@meisterT meisterT deleted the clars_restric branch September 12, 2025 19:52
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants