-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
TwitGet: Check if join dates match #89
Comments
Twitter recycles names? Fuuuuck. |
@fake-name I take it back, I think finding the internal ID for Twitter users is going to be necessary after all, due to retweets... if the username behind a retweet is changed, the retweet persists but xA-Scraper is going to think the source is different. What a fucking mess Twitter is. Honestly I think the way to go is going to be migrating the data over to the internal user id, including renaming the directories. With the structure the way it is, I have to use a file indexer to find stuff anyway, so it won't be any major loss. |
You ok? Did this revelation kill you? |
No, I've just been super busy with other projects. If you wanna hear more then anyone should need to know about debugging modbus-RTU over a pseudo open-collector shared serial bus, I'm your man at this point. |
Sometimes people change their twitter handle or delete their account. As if that wasn't bad enough, sometimes someone else starts using the same handle.
Sometimes users even go back to their old handle after realizing being on their new handle is causing confusion.
My thinking is that a migration should be put into effect where their join dates are appended to their folder name and their database entry, in brackets (since you cannot have brackets in your twitter handle) with the format [YYYYMMDD]. That way the only collision will be if someone takes over the same handle with the exact same join date.
You could also use some sort of internal ID that probably exists in the Twitter API somewhere if that slim chance of a collision is an issue, but the join date is the more intuitive option.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: