On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:27 AM, Waleed Abdulla <[email protected]> wrote: > when I get an update from the hub, > it doesn't include the topic URL with it. The topic URL should be in the entry that you receive. Why duplicate it?
bob wyman On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:27 AM, Waleed Abdulla <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure, I'm for keeping the specs simple. I just wanted to share a practical > obstacle I encountered while implementing the specs, and it's up to you guys > to decide if it's worth doing anything about it. > > I did spend a few hours today implementing the unsubscribe functionality. > And, yes, I know, it should theoretically take no more than 10 minutes, but > my system is complex and the parts that handle subscribing are different > from the parts that handle un-subscribing. The problem I faced was that when > I get an update from the hub, it doesn't include the topic URL with it. I do > include an identifier of the blog in the callback URL, but if the blog has > been deleted from my system, then the only way to find the topic URL is to > parse the feed and extract the "self" link. This works most of the time, > except when the feed is malformed. In which case, there is not much I can do > other than letting the subscription expire on it's own. > > This brings me to another suggestion: it would be super nice if the hub > sends the hub_url and topic_url as headers in the POST so it's easier to > tell where the update is coming from. > > Regards, > Waleed > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Bob Wyman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Waleed Abdulla <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > What if, as a subscriber, when I receive a ping >> > for a feed that I don't care about anymore, >> > I simply reply with the word "unsubscribe" >> > in the body to tell the hub to get me off the list? >> While your proposal sounds pretty easy, it would make the PSHB >> specification more complex while not really adding any more capability to >> the system. My personal preference would be to keep the core specification >> as simple as possible and only increase its complexity when doing so >> actually delivers new capabilities. >> >> bob wyman >> >> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Waleed Abdulla <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hey everyone, >>> While implementing PubSubHubbub and using it in production, I >>> realized that there are several situations in which I need to un-subscribe >>> from a feed. Per the specs, the right approach, is to send an unsubscribe >>> request. While this works, there could be an easier way: What if, as a >>> subscriber, when I receive a ping for a feed that I don't care about >>> anymore, I simply reply with the word "unsubscribe" in the body to tell the >>> hub to get me off the list? >>> >>> When I receive a ping, I have to check it out and decide what to do >>> with it, and that's the perfect time to decide if I want to unsubscribe. By >>> making it super easy to unsubscribe, I believe we'll have less pings that >>> get ignored because the subscriber can't be bothered to send a proper >>> unsubscribe request. Thoughts? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Waleed >>> >>> >> >
