On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Manjula Rathnayake <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Amila Suriarachchi <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Manjula Rathnayake <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Hi danushaka, >>> >>> Thanks for pointing out some mismatch with current sqs implementation >>> with sqs api. I will go through the api again and will do the required >>> changes before monday. >>> >> >> There is no hurry. So take sometime and write a test case for each fault >> scenario. Then for authorization etc .. >> Then check with the UI as well whether users are shown the others message >> boxes etc .. >> > > Sure, I am adding possible error codes and write set of test cases for each > one. We should be able to run our sqs implementation with a current sqs > client, In Amazon SQS, they provide a SDK too, > Nice idea. you should be able to test our sqs service with Amazon client. thanks, Amila. > We will try using it once the authentication part also completed. > >> >> In carbon there is no owner concept with the Authorization manager. so you >> have check that in your code. There is no problem with that approach. >> >> But we can add all the permissions to the owner when creating a message >> box. This way the only have to check with the Authorization manager to check >> the permissions. >> > > Yes, That is correct. It should be allowed when creating message box. > >> >> thanks, >> Amila. >> >> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Manjula Rathnayake >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Since the ultimate objective is to get an existing SQS client to work >>>>> with our MessageBox implementation, we need to verify that before the >>>>> beta. >>>>> We need to use SQS standard error codes in our SOAP faults. Also I notice >>>>> that we need to do little changes to make the behaviour identical. (e.g. >>>>> updating visibility timeout) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, I will add the error codes and change the visibility timeout value >>>> with remaining value + new timeout value. As currently it is updating only >>>> with new timeout value. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Danushka >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Carbon-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Manjula Rathnayaka >>>> Software Engineer >>>> WSO2, Inc. >>>> Mobile: <+94777431987>+94 77 743 1987 <+94777431987> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Manjula Rathnayaka >>> Software Engineer >>> WSO2, Inc. >>> Mobile:+94 77 743 1987 <+94777431987> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Carbon-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Carbon-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev >> >> > > Thank you. > > -- > Manjula Rathnayaka > Software Engineer > WSO2, Inc. > Mobile:+94 77 743 1987 > > _______________________________________________ > Carbon-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Carbon-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev
