esme-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Imtiaz Ahmed H E" <in.imt...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Fw: ESME - 266 - my fix in progress, hopefully...
Date Fri, 03 Sep 2010 05:20:08 GMT
Sorry, I posted the mail in the wrong thread. I have now changed the subject 
line.

My concern is, "feed link got thro' right-click on RSS icon at bottom of 
nytimes.com and "copy link location" in windows context menu and paste" into 
say, FeedReader (perhaps any other feed reader app too) sets up the feed 
correctly.

So, should we handle this in Esme too... CAN WE ? Should I?

By the way what about the Twitter problem in the mail I sent along with the 
nytimes proble (see below).

Imtiaz

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vassil Dichev" <vdichev@apache.org>
To: <esme-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: ESME-267 - Pooled links in popular links list


Well, it's obvious that if the XML couldn't parse the XML, then it's
not valid XML. Add to this the fact that it contains a "meta" tag and
it's clear that what's at the other end of the link was actually HTML.
If you go to http://www.nytimes.com/rss, you'll notice this yourself.

The real feed can be found by following the browser feed icon in the
URL bar. It takes you to what the page describes as a feed in the tag
<link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" ... />. If you follow
it, you will get to this URL:

http://feeds.nytimes.com/nyt/rss/HomePage

Try it, it should work.

Vassil


On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 2:35 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <in.imtiaz@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> I have an action
>
> every 1 mins rss:http://www.nytimes.com/rss
>
> feed link got thro' right-click on RSS icon at bottom of nytimes.com and
> "copy link location" in windows context menu and paste into esme with rss:
> prepended.
>
> and,
>
> every 1 mins atom:http://twitter.com/statuses/user_timeline/esjewett.atom
>
> and I get in the Tomcat Window,
>
> WARN - Going to buffer response body of large or unknown size. Using
> getResponse
> BodyAsStream instead is recommended.
> :37:31: expected closing tag of meta
> <a
> href="http://www.nytimes.com/pages/sports/index.html">Sports<
> /a>
> ^
>
>
> and, apparently for the twitter feed,
>
> WARN - Going to buffer response body of large or unknown size. Using
> getResponse
> BodyAsStream instead is recommended.
> :37:31: expected closing tag of meta
> <a
> href="http://www.nytimes.com/pages/sports/index.html">Sports<
> /a>
> ^
> WARN - Cookie rejected: "$Version=0; k=122.167.31.233.1283470309076286;
> $Path=/;
> $Domain=.twitter.com". Illegal domain attribute ".twitter.com". Domain of
> origi
> n: "twitter.com"
> WARN - Cookie rejected: "$Version=0;
> _twitter_sess=BAh7CDoPY3JlYXRlZF9hdGwrCNq2y
> tQqAToHaWQiJWRjMTNkMjQ2ZGRiYjA2%250AOTU1ZGZjMTc1NjMxMTZhN2I4IgpmbGFzaElDOidBY3Rp
> b25Db250cm9sbGVy%250AOjpGbGFzaDo6Rmxhc2hIYXNoewAGOgpAdXNlZHsA--f65405470eedc4a64
> defa69a0e78d22bd676cc0c; $Path=/; $Domain=.twitter.com". Illegal domain
> attribut
> e ".twitter.com". Domain of origin: "twitter.com"
>
>
>
> No feed updates in Esme.
>
> Vassil, would you want to fix this or shall I look into it.
>
> Imtiaz
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vassil Dichev" <vdichev@apache.org>
> To: <esme-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 1:29 AM
> Subject: Re: ESME-267 - Pooled links in popular links list
>
>
>> Fixed. Now if you post the same link to a pool and to the public, you
>> will notice that the href attribute points to the internal shortened
>> URL in the former case and to the target URL in the latter case. This
>> means that popularity statistics will only be gathered when links on
>> public messages are clicked.
>>
>> An unique ID is still generated for all URLs but for links in pooled
>> messages they're not visible.
>>
>> This should fix the problem. Does someone want to verify that we have
>> indeed the correct behavior?
>>
>> Vassil
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Richard Hirsch <hirsch.dick@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sounds like a god idea.
>>>
>>> D.
>>>
>>> On 8/31/10, Vassil Dichev <vdichev@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Right, we just don't generate and store a unique ID for links in pools
>>>> and will generate a different object on parsing. This way links which
>>>> come from pools will point directly to the target URL and links from
>>>> public messages will be redirected through the internal shortened URL,
>>>> which will allow statistics to be collected. This won't break any
>>>> functionality and I think it could be done fairly easily.
>>>>
>>>> I will assign ESME-267 to me if nobody objects to the proposed 
>>>> solution.
>>>>
>>>> Vassil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Richard Hirsch <hirsch.dick@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Leave original link but just don't add it to PopularLinks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/31/10, Ethan Jewett <esjewett@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, I see. Yes, that would make sense. So we would just leave the
>>>>>> original link in there, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ethan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Richard Hirsch
>>>>>> <hirsch.dick@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree with the solution of just removing those links that 
>>>>>>> originate
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> pools.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> D.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/31/10, Vassil Dichev <vdichev@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK, I think this is a worse example, because there are many
ways to
>>>>>>>> find a list of URLs in a wiki (which were generally just
not
>>>>>>>> designed
>>>>>>>> with privacy/security in mind).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you're willing to sacrifice convenience for security,
the 
>>>>>>>> easiest
>>>>>>>> change is not to parse URLs in messages in pools- it will
appear as
>>>>>>>> normal text, not as a hyperlink. The next thing we can do
is set up
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> different type of URL which doesn't take you to the shortened
URL,
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> directly to the target URL.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If one really insists on shortening URLs in pools, then there
must
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> one set of shortened URLs per pool. I don't think anyone
will claim
>>>>>>>> that this idea makes sense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Vassil
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Ethan Jewett <esjewett@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree in theory with your assessment of the google
docs
>>>>>>>>> situation,
>>>>>>>>> but I still think we're violating the expectation of
security
>>>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>>>> pools.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Take another example: An HR department is using a secure
wiki to
>>>>>>>>> discuss and organize an upcoming layoff. The wiki page
is titled
>>>>>>>>> "October layoff planning" and the URL is
>>>>>>>>> https://hrwiki.corp.internal/October-layoff-planning.
Someone 
>>>>>>>>> posts
>>>>>>>>> this URL to the layoff-planning pool on esme (the same
group of
>>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>>> with access to the wiki page) and a bunch of people in
the pool
>>>>>>>>> click
>>>>>>>>> on it. Suddenly, the upcoming layoff has been announced
to every
>>>>>>>>> esme
>>>>>>>>> user in the corporation. Whoops!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The point is, maybe that private information shouldn't
be in the
>>>>>>>>> URL,
>>>>>>>>> but a lot of applications do this whether or not it is
a good 
>>>>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> think we need to take that reality into account and change
the way
>>>>>>>>> this works to avoid the possibility of these scenarios.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ethan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 31, 2010, Vassil Dichev <vdichev@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ethan, this defeats the purpose of having an URL
shortener and it
>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>> gives you a false sense of security. Read my previous
mail.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Links have no notion of a pool. A link could come
from messages 
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> different pools or it might not be clicked "inside
a message" at
>>>>>>>>>> all.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Let me know what you think.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Vassil
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Ethan Jewett 
>>>>>>>>>> <esjewett@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [Changed subject to start a new thread. Was:
"New issues - a
>>>>>>>>>>> couple
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> blockers for 1.1 release"]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That's correct. The "Popular messages" functionality
just keeps 
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> counter of how many times a message has been
resent. If you look
>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>> the UserActor.scala, lines 197 & 198, you'll
see that the
>>>>>>>>>>> statistic
>>>>>>>>>>> "ResendStat" is incremented when a message is
resent, but only 
>>>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> message is not in a pool. Then when we want to
find out what the
>>>>>>>>>>> most
>>>>>>>>>>> popular messages are, we ask the PopStatsActor
- for example in
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> "popular" method of UserSnip.scala - line 213.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, the "LinkClicked is incremented
in
>>>>>>>>>>> UrlStore.scala
>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>> line 40. Here there is never a check to see if
the link came 
>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> message in a pool. (This counter is used in the
"links" method 
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>> UserSnip.scala, after the "popular" method.)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think we need to check if a link came from
a pool before
>>>>>>>>>>> incrementing the counter, but in order to do
this we need to
>>>>>>>>>>> record
>>>>>>>>>>> what pool a link belonged to, so I think we need
to make pool
>>>>>>>>>>> part
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> the key of the UrlStore object and then populate
this field when
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>>> link is created.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ethan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed
H E
>>>>>>>>>>> <in.imtiaz@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In the home when I type in a message sharing
it with one pool
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> click
>>>>>>>>>>>> resend it does not show up in Popular Messages.
But if the
>>>>>>>>>>>> message
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> public
>>>>>>>>>>>> it shows up on resend in Popular Pessages.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you explain. Haven't gotten to Popular
Links yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Imtiaz
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ethan
Jewett"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <esjewett@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: <esme-dev@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 11:37 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: New issues - a couple of blockers
for 1.1 release
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue doesn't happen with Popular Messages,
only with
>>>>>>>>>>>> Popular
>>>>>>>>>>>> Links.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I need to look into the implementation, but
I have a feeling 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Popular Links issue is going to be a headache.
I believe that
>>>>>>>>>>>> for a
>>>>>>>>>>>> given link there is no way to tell what message
it shows up in,
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>>>>> would make it impossible to tell if it is
a link from a pooled
>>>>>>>>>>>> message
>>>>>>>>>>>> or not. We may have to modify the data model
for storing links
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> flag
>>>>>>>>>>>> the ones that started out in a pooled message...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding Pubsubhubbub, as Dick said, there's
no hurry. I don't
>>>>>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll be working on it over the next couple
of weeks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for all your efforts!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ethan
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:20 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed
H E
>>>>>>>>>>>> <in.imtiaz@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Re https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ESME-267
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't tried this but plan to fix
it right away.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tell me, is it only the links showing
up in 'Popular Links' or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem with the message itself also
showing up in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'PopularMessages'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like I'll never get going with
pubsubhubub ! First there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dick's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Release Planning mail with the pending
1.1 issues and now here
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more. Plan to get going after all 1.1
ending issues are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolved.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, Ethan it was your issue originally
and if you feel 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it back again to push it to closure faster
or something please
>>>>>>>>>>>>> do,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll re-start on it once 1.1 is done...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Imtiaz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard
Hirsch"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hirsch.dick@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: <
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> 


Mime
View raw message