[ 
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: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org

Reply via email to