[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-3554?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17315682#comment-17315682
]
Daniel Gultsch commented on JAMES-3554:
---------------------------------------
Yes the EventSource id is indeed optional. However looking at the 'pushState'
it seems like James has an equivalent mechanism internally so it would be a
shame not to use this. But yes. I agree that this is covered by
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-3531.
> JMAP EventSource uncessary 'pushState' but no Event id
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JAMES-3554
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-3554
> Project: James Server
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JMAP
> Affects Versions: master
> Reporter: Daniel Gultsch
> Assignee: Antoine Duprat
> Priority: Major
>
> The JSON object send as an event over EventSource contains a pushState
> paramater.
> {code:json}
> {"@type":"StateChange","changed":{"cf2e474f942d8ea3192028d2e37d5b08b3ddd36fb986d2ad6a19d66277a981c4":{"Email":"b7ee2d20-96ec-11eb-b57c-1b93c9e59cb7"}},"pushState":"ddc397e7a13fd27566ec3b7ed9bcc702c4c097e1ad83ebc8b909f3d5be459345"}
> {code}
> This pushState parameter is not defined in RFC 8620 7.1 and is therefor
> unnecessary. It is an extension that only the WebSocket protocol uses.
> However EventSource defines it's own event ids inband that are probably (not
> knowing a lot about the server side of this implementation) functionally
> equivalent.
> James should use the EventSource’s id instead of putting the id in the JSON
> payload.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
