[Suggestion] improve display of repeater names in "heard repeats" section of sent messages when more than 1 contact matches. #250

New Issue

2026-10-27T15:45:53+01:00

adam commented

2026-10-27 15:45:53 +01:00

Describe the bug

When I view the details of a sent message (in this case, a channel message), in the Repeats: section, some repeater hashes are expanded to full names as known by the contact list, others are not although contacts exist.

Specifically:

I currently have a message where the Repeats: section shows:

Repeats:
1) r_____l [5E]
2) D_____P [51]
3) -- (3) [2B]
4) -- (3) [90]
5) -- (2) [75]

(the _ are a bunch censored characters which I have removed by hand.)

The numbers in brackets seem to indicate how many matching contacts were found (and since also non-repeaters could repeat it seems to be more correct behaviour to do it as you currently do it: Include all contacts, not only repeaters. Am I correct?)

A small suggestion: When multiple contacts are possible, first check if there is only one matching repeater. If so, print it's name (since it likely was that repeater and not a user who did repeat the message) and only add name prefixes of the other contacts and the total number in brackets behind, indicating that there could have been also another contact repeating, e.g.:
3) F_____n/L_/W_ (3) [2B] (only one matching repeater, named F_____n, found in the contacts list, and two matching non-repeater contacts whose names start with L_ and W_)

When there are more than one matching repeater, or no repeaters (but other contacts) matching, display it like
4) D_/6_ (2) [90]
(where D_ and 6_ are the first very few characters of the matching contacts), and on tap show a selection dialogue if #234 is to be implented for "heard repeats" view.

When multiple (parts of) names are displayed, colour them maybe by node type?

Which device are you using

LilyGO T-Deck Plus

Which Firmware are you using

v0.9.12

Regards!

**Describe the bug** When I view the details of a sent message (in this case, a channel message), in the `Repeats:` section, some repeater hashes are expanded to full names as known by the contact list, others are not although contacts exist. Specifically: I currently have a message where the `Repeats:` section shows: ``` Repeats: 1) r_____l [5E] 2) D_____P [51] 3) -- (3) [2B] 4) -- (3) [90] 5) -- (2) [75] ``` *(the `_` are a bunch censored characters which I have removed by hand.)* The numbers in brackets seem to indicate how many matching contacts were found (and since also non-repeaters could repeat it seems to be more correct behaviour to do it as you currently do it: Include _all_ contacts, not only repeaters. Am I correct?) A small suggestion: When multiple contacts are possible, first check if there is only one matching repeater. If so, print it's name (since it likely was that repeater and not a user who did repeat the message) and only add name prefixes of the other contacts and the total number in brackets behind, indicating that there _could_ have been also another contact repeating, e.g.: `3) F_____n/L_/W_ (3) [2B]` (only one matching repeater, named `F_____n`, found in the contacts list, and two matching non-repeater contacts whose names _start_ with `L_` and `W_`) When there are more than one matching repeater, or no repeaters (but other contacts) matching, display it like `4) D_/6_ (2) [90]` (where `D_` and `6_` are the first very few characters of the matching contacts), and on tap show a selection dialogue if #234 is to be implented for "heard repeats" view. When multiple (parts of) names are displayed, colour them maybe by node type? **Which device are you using** LilyGO T-Deck Plus **Which Firmware are you using** v0.9.12 Regards!

adam commented

2026-10-27 15:45:54 +01:00

i really like that idea - at least it gives us more visibility with such small screens.

i really like that idea - at least it gives us more visibility with such small screens.

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: adam/meshcore#250