shindig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dan Dumont" <ddum...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: getModuleId
Date Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:29:02 GMT
The container wishing to navigate a gadget to a saved instance, a new 
saved instance, or the default unsaved instance of 0.



From:   Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>
To:     dev@shindig.apache.org, 
Date:   01/27/2012 02:16 AM
Subject:        Re: getModuleId



Dan,

In the Shindig code, who is responsible to set
"osapi.container.RenderParam.MODULE_ID" in the render params for
services's getGadgetMetadata() function?

- Henry

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Dan Dumont <ddumont@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Not a problem.
>
> mid is for the moduleId.  (maybe it wasn't always so... but for
> consistency sake it probably should remain so)
> IIRC, Prefs.getModuleId returns the value in the ifr url 'mid' param.
>
> Your GET_PREFERENCES/SET_PREFERENCES impl should be getting the siteid,
> which it can look up a gadget site with.
> You can then determine the moduleId (which should be 0 for now).
>
> I agree, if the rpc requests do not pass the gadget's token along, they
> probably should now.  Most people will be wanting to key things off of 
the
> moduleId rather than the siteId.  The moduleId is baked in the token and
> not something one could spoof with firebug.
>
>
> From:   daviesd <daviesd@oclc.org>
> To:     <dev@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date:   01/23/2012 01:34 PM
> Subject:        Re: getModuleId
>
>
>
> In pref.js shindig was setting the Prefs moduleId to the "mid" 
parameter.
> Perhaps something is different here now.  So for whatever reason that 
use
> to
> return me whatever I had as my siteId and now it doesn't.
>
> At any rate, this is a TEST gadget that is probably trying to access
> something it shouldn't.  When the userprefs are stored they are stored
> using
> the siteId granted by our container implementation (the container
> registers
> SET_PREFERENCES and GET_PREFERENCES handlers).  I think I opened up this
> ticket because of that.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1557
>
> It would really be nice if the rpc requests used the gadget security 
token
> (that would hopefully have the moduleId set now that you've implemented
> that).
>
> So in my test gadget I don't know what the siteId is.  For some reason I
> was
> calling Prefs().getModuleId (I think this thread suggests that).
>
> http://shindig-dev.markmail.org/thread/zyi2zvpn7akhrbi3
>
> Is there another way for a gadget to know this?  I realize implementing
> moduleId would probably give me this (although a gadget doesn't really
> know
> what's in it's security token, but it can certainly pass it along to api
> calls).
>
> Sorry if I'm muddying the waters.  I should have been more active in 
your
> moduleId discussion.
>
> doug
>
>
> On 1/23/12 12:57 PM, "Dan Dumont" <ddumont@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hrmm... I don't recall moduleId ever being anything other than 0.
>>
>> The discussions have focused around what a moduleId is (a number that's
>> baked into the security token, primarily used to identify saved
> instances
>> of a gadget) and what a siteId is ( a string value that's used in or as
> an
>> id attribute of a DOM element in the container ).  The recent patches
>> created a way to generate, save, and track moduleIds on the server,
> should
>> you choose to implement the bits, otherwise they return 0 as they 
always
>> have.
>>
>> I'm curious how you got numbers other than 0.  Especially for the
> security
>> token, moduleId was always 0 in shindig.
>>
>>
>>
>> From:   daviesd <daviesd@oclc.org>
>> To:     shindig <dev@shindig.apache.org>,
>> Date:   01/23/2012 12:51 PM
>> Subject:        getModuleId
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a gadget that was using
>>
>> var moduleId = new gadgets.Prefs().getModuleId();
>>
>> To get the current moduleId (siteId) of the gadget so that it could
>> retrieve
>> userprefs
>>
>> osapi.userprefs.get( { siteId : moduleId } )
>>
>> This is now return 0 instead of the id I have for the element the 
gadget
>> was
>> rendered into.
>>
>> I haven¹t kept up with the whole moduleId/siteId patch that is going 
on,
>> but
>> perhaps something has changed here and is not backwards compatible?
>>
>> Any ideas?  It¹s been a while since I¹ve played around with userprefs
> and
>> today was the first I noticed it wasn¹t working.
>>
>> doug
>>
>
>
>



Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message