Matt I think the timeline for the release should be covered in a separate thread. I don't want this thread to loose focus. I
-Ryan On Aug 22, 2012, at 4:17 PM, "Franklin, Matthew B." <mfrank...@mitre.org> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Henry Saputra [mailto:henry.sapu...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 7:17 PM >> To: dev@shindig.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Changing oauthpopup feature to introduce some container >> cooperation... >> >> Dan, >> >> Since we are close to release 2.5 I would vote for option 4. > > My first instinct is to agree with Henry that this should wait. On the other > hand, we don't really have a roadmap for 2.5, so I would say weigh the value > of the change, over cost of breakage. I don't think adding it to core really > solves anything, so if you are going to change it I would recommend 1 and > make sure it is part of the release/upgrade documentation. > > Do we have a timeline for 2.5 RELEASE? > > My $0.02. > >> >> We have other issues with Shindig to follow OS specs so unless it crucial >> bug fix I think we should leave it for now. >> >> >> - Henry >> >> On Tuesday, August 21, 2012, Ryan Baxter <rbaxte...@apache.org> wrote: >>> I like option 1 but can understand why people would be upset, so option 4 >>> may be your only option. Although I hope we could do option 1 post 2.5... >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Dan Dumont <ddum...@us.ibm.com> >> wrote: >>> >>>> I've been looking at having the oauth popup feature make some calls into >>>> the container over rpc to handle the popup for various reasons, one of >>>> which is to work around browser popup blockers. >>>> The container could implement the feature as a litebox instead of a >> popup. >>>> >>>> This change though requires some changes that will probably break >>>> unsuspecting upgraders... so my options are as follows: >>>> >>>> 1) Refactor oauthpopup and break unsuspecting containers when they >>>> upgrade. >>>> 2) Refactor oauthpopup and add it to core (it's pretty small) so that no >>>> one gets hurt on the upgrade. >>>> 3) Refactor oauthpopup and add only the container part to core (this gets >>>> kinda messy... ) >>>> 4) LEAVE MY OAUTHPOPUP ALONE! (mess with my own copy, but don't >> change >>>> shindig) >>>> Btw, the default implementation in my refactor calls window.open just >> like >>>> the old one, only now the container is doing the window.open instead of >>>> the gadget. >>>> >>>> What does the community think the best approach would be? >>>