[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #23136 [Applications/Tor Launcher]: moat integration (fetch bridges for the user)
#23136: moat integration (fetch bridges for the user)
--------------------------------------------+------------------------------
Reporter: mcs | Owner: brade
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: Very High | Milestone:
Component: Applications/Tor Launcher | Version:
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: TorBrowserTeam201802R, ux-team | Actual Points:
Parent ID: #24689 | Points:
Reviewer: | Sponsor: Sponsor4
--------------------------------------------+------------------------------
Comment (by brade):
Replying to [comment:63 gk]:
> Here comes another round:
>
> 11) "We allow response.data to be an array or object". What about
> `response.errors`?
The JSON API spec says that `errors` must be an array but `data` does not
have to be an array (see http://jsonapi.org/format/#document-top-level).
Isis implemented the `data` payload as an array, but we wanted to be
robust and allow it to be an object (we can remove that code if you want
us to do so; for a long time we did not have a server to talk to ;)
> 12) Spec says 'error', yet we check for `response.errors`, typo?
That was a typo in the spec which Isis has fixed.
> 13) braces mix
> ...
We will fix this.
> 14) // Returns a promise that is fulfilled with an object that
contains:
> // captchaImage
>
> Do you mean "image" here instead of "captchaImage"? I looked at the spec
and thought this was another instance of the spec you linked to being
outdated but then I saw `image` in `_parseFetchResponse()`. If so, could
you order the attributes in the comment lines: `transport`, `image`, and
`challenge` as outlined in the spec?
Our code actually transforms `image` in the Moat response to
`captchaImage` in the JS object that is created and returned. It was
clearer to us to use a more descriptive name. We will reorder the
property names in the comment.
>
> 15)
>
> {{{
> * If there is no overlap between the type of bridge we requested
and
> * the transports which BridgeDB supports, the response is the same
except
> * the transport property will contain an array of supported
transports:
> * ...
> * "transport": [ "TRANSPORT", "TRANSPORT", ... ],
> }}}
>
> Really? The spec seems to say
> ...
This was a spec change that came about during some conversations we had
with Isis. The comment we have is correct based on the current spec.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23136#comment:66>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs