[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1669?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13164404#comment-13164404
]
[email protected] commented on SHINDIG-1669:
--------------------------------------------------------
bq. On 2011-12-06 23:03:02, Stanton Sievers wrote:
bq. >
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js,
line 934
bq. > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3037/diff/2/?file=62529#file62529line934>
bq. >
bq. > I'd rather be checking for a status of any 2xx code. I'd rather
treat redirects and other 3xx codes as failures if they are going to fail at
render time anyway.
bq. >
bq. > Also, what is the difference between checking response.error and
response.status. Shouldn't they indicate the same thing?
bq.
bq. Ryan Baxter wrote:
bq. I ignored the 3xx codes because I figured the browser would be able to
handle them and redirect the iframe accordingly.
bq.
bq. I looked into the response.error case. It looks like that will happen
if something goes wrong in the containers proxy. The response.status is the
result of actually making the http request.
bq.
bq. Stanton Sievers wrote:
bq. Wouldn't we want to follow any 3xx redirects to ensure that the final
content is available?
bq.
bq. Another idea I thought of that might be worth evaluating... what if
you proxied the iframe urls through Shindig's proxy servlet and returned an
error page from there? Maybe add a query param flag that the proxy servlet can
read to know whether to return the original response or an error page. That
could at least solve the issue of having several http requests.
bq.
bq. The response.error and response.status stuff makes sense.
I don't think that would work. I don't think the proxy would be able to
rewrite all of the content and fix images, css, links, etc... for the page to
function properly.
- Dan
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3037/#review3681
-----------------------------------------------------------
On 2011-12-06 22:36:38, Ryan Baxter wrote:
bq.
bq. -----------------------------------------------------------
bq. This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
bq. https://reviews.apache.org/r/3037/
bq. -----------------------------------------------------------
bq.
bq. (Updated 2011-12-06 22:36:38)
bq.
bq.
bq. Review request for shindig, Dan Dumont and Stanton Sievers.
bq.
bq.
bq. Summary
bq. -------
bq.
bq. When you call commoncontainer.navigateUrl if the URL cannot be reached the
caller has no way of knowing if the URL was navigated successfully or not. To
solve this we make a head request to the URL we are navigating to and add a
callback to the API.
bq.
bq. It is important to note that we will not be caching the response of the
head request. While this could possibly give us better performance we have no
way of guaranteeing the server will still be up next time and everything may
fail. This is different from the gadget case where we have the gadget XML
cached on the server.
bq.
bq.
bq. This addresses bug SHINDIG-1669.
bq. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1669
bq.
bq.
bq. Diffs
bq. -----
bq.
bq.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/open-views/viewenhancements-container.js
1211103
bq.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/embeddedexperiences/embedded_experiences_container.js
1211103
bq.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container/container.js
1211103
bq.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascript/features/container.util/util.js
1211103
bq.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/content/samplecontainer/examples/embeddedexperiences/PhotoList.xml
1211103
bq.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/test/javascript/features/container.url/container_url_test.js
1211103
bq.
bq. Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3037/diff
bq.
bq.
bq. Testing
bq. -------
bq.
bq. Tested in container as well as updating unit tests.
bq.
bq.
bq. Thanks,
bq.
bq. Ryan
bq.
bq.
> Navigating to URLs in the common container has no indication of success or
> failure
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SHINDIG-1669
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1669
> Project: Shindig
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0
> Reporter: Ryan Baxter
> Original Estimate: 48h
> Remaining Estimate: 48h
>
> When you call commoncontainer.navigateUrl if the URL cannot be reached the
> caller has no way of knowing if the URL was navigated successfully or not.
> To solve this we make a head request to the URL we are navigating to and add
> a callback to the API.
> It is important to note that we will not be caching the response of the head
> request. While this could possibly give us better performance we have no way
> of guaranteeing the server will still be up next time and everything may
> fail. This is different from the gadget case where we have the gadget XML
> cached on the server.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
