> On 2011-12-15 00:07:05, Henry Saputra wrote: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js, > > line 233 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/diff/3/?file=64601#file64601line233> > > > > Shouldnt this call happen? The default shindig.auth contributor is > > using anonymous security token
I think I mentioned on the thread in the list that this change was breaking the jsunit tests. I'm not sure how to properly do a sync testing with our jsunit tests. > On 2011-12-15 00:07:05, Henry Saputra wrote: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js, > > line 704 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/diff/3/?file=64601#file64601line704> > > > > The declaration of updateContainerSecurityToken doesnt have to be > > inside the anon "(function() {" right? It does because it needs scope of the helper functions and the variables associated with the refresh. > On 2011-12-15 00:07:05, Henry Saputra wrote: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js, > > line 710 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/diff/3/?file=64601#file64601line710> > > > > Shouldnt this 95/100? The var is already 80% of the actual value. We need to convert it to 95% of the normal value. - Dan ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/#review3911 ----------------------------------------------------------- On 2011-12-14 16:35:00, Dan Dumont wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2011-12-14 16:35:00) > > > Review request for shindig, Ryan Baxter, li xu, Jesse Ciancetta, Henry > Saputra, and Stanton Sievers. > > > Summary > ------- > > Initial review of 1st change. Allowing common container to manage container > token refreshes. Also, refresh of gadget security tokens will now wait for > valid container security token before trying to refresh. > > > Diffs > ----- > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js > 1213887 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > Tested code in a private container with some examples of setting no refresh > (ttl = 0) and setting an initial token (if it was written by jsp page to > avoid transaction) etc.. > > > Thanks, > > Dan > >
