we plan to reuse this message for both primary device logout and logging out a single secondary device from the primary device.
Depends on D13037
Details
Details
Rename so just ran flow
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rCOMM Comm
- Branch
- hackathon (branched from master)
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Just two questions, will let @bartek accept as I don't have context on this decision.
Would appreciate answer to two questions:
- Can you explain why we want to reuse this message for those two separate use cases, intead of having two separate ones?
- I'm a bit worried about changing the values in userActionsP2PMessageTypes... seeing it checked by a validator makes me wonder if this will introduce version compatibility issues. Can you explain why that's safe here? I'm guessing it wouldn't be safe after we launch this work, but perhaps it's not being used in production yet.
Comment Actions
This message is sent by the primary device to inform a secondary device that it should visually log out. In the "primary device logout" protocol, it's sent to all secondary devices. In the scenario implemented by this stack, it's sent to just only one device. But it has exactly the same meaning for the recipient. I mentioned this and suggested the rename in this comment.
- I'm a bit worried about changing the values in userActionsP2PMessageTypes... seeing it checked by a validator makes me wonder if this will introduce version compatibility issues. Can you explain why that's safe here? I'm guessing it wouldn't be safe after we launch this work, but perhaps it's not being used in production yet.
Good point. I guess you're right: we're not using this code in prod yet: its existing usage for primary device logout is hidden behind the isDev flag.
Comment Actions
Good point. I guess you're right: we're not using this code in prod yet: its existing usage for primary device logout is hidden behind the isDev flag.
that's right