Lo noté en el menú de acciones masivas (visible en la página de búsqueda, al usar la selección masiva para uno o más publicaciones).
Hay dos opciones de eliminación:
La confirmación para «Eliminar publicaciones» parece clara, pero la confirmación para «Eliminar temas» resulta confusa, en mi opinión.
Eliminar permanentemente los temas seleccionados. Esta acción no se puede deshacer.
de: js.topic_bulk_actions.delete_topics.description
Si confirmo la eliminación de los temas seleccionados, estos se eliminan de forma normal (suave) y pueden restaurarse.
Esto ocurre con la configuración del sitio can_permanently_delete establecida en false (predeterminado).
Además, no parece haber una distinción visual entre los resultados de búsqueda que son temas y los que son publicaciones/respuestas, aparte de pasar el cursor sobre ellos y mirar el final de la URL. Esto hace que el uso de estas dos opciones de eliminación masiva sea un poco poco intuitivo para los moderadores, en mi opinión.
3 Me gusta
Estamos en proceso de mejorar las “acciones” disponibles en modo por lotes, pero esta en particular se nos pasó por alto porque aún no está disponible.
main ← fix-bulk-delete-topics-copy
merged 07:46AM - 25 Aug 26 UTC
Reported in [Bulk actions confusion - Delete Topics](https://meta.discourse.org/… t/410444).
Selecting topics and choosing **Delete** asks you to confirm:
> Permanently delete the selected topics. This action cannot be undone.
…and then soft deletes them, so they can be recovered. Not search-specific — the same modal is used by every topic list.
There is no configuration where the copy is true. `TopicsBulkAction#delete` builds `PostDestroyer` with an empty options hash, so `permanent?` is never satisfied, and `PUT /topics/bulk` doesn't permit `force_destroy` in the first place. `can_permanently_delete` has no bearing on this path. The description was added with the copy pass in 4b6169028f and never matched the behaviour.
### Also fixed
Two long-standing bugs in the same six lines:
- `delete` was the only operation in `TopicsBulkAction` that never appended to `@changed_ids`, so the endpoint always answered `{"topic_ids":[]}`. A bulk delete where the guardian skipped every topic looked exactly like a successful one, toast included.
- `ordered_posts` is scoped by `Trashable`, so for a topic whose first post was already deleted it returned post 2. `is_first_post?` was then false, `@topic.trash!` never ran, and an unrelated reply was deleted while the topic stayed alive — reported as a success. `TopicsController#destroy` already gets this right with `ordered_posts.with_deleted.first`.
### Follow-ups, not in this PR
- `ordered_posts.first` feeding `PostDestroyer` carries the same latent bug at five other call sites: `Jobs::DeleteTopic`, three in `DestroyTask`, and `TopicGuardian#can_recover_topic?`. Worth a `Topic` accessor rather than a sixth hand-rolled copy.
- Search results give no hint whether a hit is a topic or a reply, which is the other half of the report. `post_number` is already serialized and `search.post_format` already exists, but is gated to the in-topic dropdown.
- Translations of this key still assert permanence until the pipeline catches up.
3 Me gusta
