Reply To functions parameter order

[netweb]

Reply To's are still not quite behaving correctly when calling bbp_get_reply_to() and bbp_update_reply_to().

We need to ensure passing the correct parameter order in both bbp_get_reply_to() and bbp_update_reply_to() functions so that the reply id is not interchanged for the reply to id.

See also bbp_validate_reply_to()

[netweb]

Related: #2528

[johnjamesjacoby]

This patch does not seem correct.

• bbp_update_reply_to()'s return value is never used. If it were, why would it return the same parent ID being passed into it VS the new reply_to value?
• Why would bbp_get_reply_to() return the same ID being passed into it? Doesn't it make more sense to return the metadata we're requesting?