Skip to content

Comments

[FS-1147] Proteus: Support creating a conversation when remote backends are unavailable#3150

Merged
mdimjasevic merged 24 commits intodevelopfrom
fs-1147/create-conv-remote-users
Mar 23, 2023
Merged

[FS-1147] Proteus: Support creating a conversation when remote backends are unavailable#3150
mdimjasevic merged 24 commits intodevelopfrom
fs-1147/create-conv-remote-users

Conversation

@mdimjasevic
Copy link
Contributor

@mdimjasevic mdimjasevic commented Mar 14, 2023

Tracked by https://wearezeta.atlassian.net/browse/FS-1147.

Checklist

  • Add a new entry in an appropriate subdirectory of changelog.d
  • Read and follow the PR guidelines

@zebot zebot added the ok-to-test Approved for running tests in CI, overrides not-ok-to-test if both labels exist label Mar 14, 2023
@mdimjasevic mdimjasevic force-pushed the fs-1147/create-conv-remote-users branch 6 times, most recently from 09a2ee7 to 86fea3f Compare March 22, 2023 13:44
@mdimjasevic mdimjasevic force-pushed the fs-1147/create-conv-remote-users branch from 86fea3f to 0adeccf Compare March 22, 2023 13:49
:> "conversations"
:> ReqBody '[Servant.JSON] NewConv
:> CreateGroupConversationVerb
)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can re-use the existing handler for this. The response change is additive, so it doesn't break backward compatibility, and removing the DOS vector also applies to the previous handler, since we're not keeping that behaviour for the previous endpoint version.

@mdimjasevic mdimjasevic marked this pull request as ready for review March 22, 2023 14:21
Copy link
Contributor

@elland elland left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd still re-use the handler but final decision is yours.

Edit: sorry, I mean the endpoint.

@mdimjasevic
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd still re-use the handler but final decision is yours.

I did reuse the handler. It's just the return type that is parameterised to fit both the < V4 and the >= V4 case.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ok-to-test Approved for running tests in CI, overrides not-ok-to-test if both labels exist

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants