You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have written a plugin that synchs blog posts from one blog to another as they are published/updated/deleted.
It uses php to hook into save_post. I noticed recently that it is no longer catching updates to co-author assignments, because it seems like co-authors sends its own HTTP request to store coauthors, long after save_post has come and gone.
This is a nuisance for me because now I have to hook in twice (now using wp_set_object_terms) to capture all post changes, roughly doubling my network activity.
This behavior from co-authors is counter-intuitive. The post should be done saving ... when save_post is done.
Should I be doing something different or thinking about this differently somehow?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@scottfennell-toptal
We have the same problem where we sync posts to a different database and need to have the data complete.
My PR doesn't solve the underlying problem you observed, but adding a new action at least helps to narrow down where to hook.
We have a patched version like this running for quite some time, which works a charm.
I hope it also helps you if the PR gets merged!
I have written a plugin that synchs blog posts from one blog to another as they are published/updated/deleted.
It uses php to hook into
save_post
. I noticed recently that it is no longer catching updates to co-author assignments, because it seems like co-authors sends its own HTTP request to store coauthors, long aftersave_post
has come and gone.This is a nuisance for me because now I have to hook in twice (now using
wp_set_object_terms
) to capture all post changes, roughly doubling my network activity.This behavior from co-authors is counter-intuitive. The post should be done saving ... when
save_post
is done.Should I be doing something different or thinking about this differently somehow?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: