GPII-1224: Implement the "Hybrid Flow Manager" #389
Conversation
And update the Untrusted Flow Manager to retrive the settings from the Cloud Based Flow Manager.
And start on unit testing.
Add nonPrivacyFilteredMatchMakingRequest and privacyFilteredMatchMakingRequest.
|
|
||
| // TODO: Restore the ability of the ontology manager to straightforwardly form single transforms and remove this hard-coded path | ||
|
|
||
| gpii.request.flowManager.privacy.privacyToSettingsTransformRules = fluid.require("${universal}/testData/ontologies/privacy-flat.json"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did we run into a problem based on this line with respect to running the web-based tests for the lifecycleManager?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I haven't encountered any issues with regards to the lifecycleManager web-based tests.
|
Hi @simonbates - I gave the branch a look over and it is looking very good. I think the main work needed to get it merged in is just to improve the factoring with respect to the existing code - that is the material duplicated from the userLogin request and the base FlowManager. Thanks for all the work on this so far! |
Conflicts: gpii/node_modules/flowManager/src/UserLogin.js
Use functions in UserLogonStateChange.js
In UntrustedDevelopmentTests.js
- Assign the combined config template to a global name - Register a listener to remove the generated config file after the tests are done - Add UntrustedDevelopmentTests.js to all-tests.js
- An anonymous token is a GPII token with no associated user - A request for an anonymous token is not subject to privacy filtering
Wrap in an enclosing anonymous function.
|
I've updated the branch to implement the new logonChange API and I've added support for anonymous tokens. As part of the logonChange work, I was able to remove the duplication in the userLogin handler. |
| { | ||
| "type": "http://registry.gpii.net/conditions/inRange", | ||
| "min": 400, | ||
| "inputPath": "http://registry\\.gpii\\.net/common/environment/visual\\.luminance" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All instances of this term in trunk should have been changed to "illuminance" rather than "visual.luminance" - I think there are a couple of solutions in testData which are still lagging - we should fix these test fixtures so they aren't a source of the old term
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've created a JIRA issue for updating the "visual.luminance" condition in test data: https://issues.gpii.net/browse/GPII-1326
|
🎉 Congratulations on this really huge and helpful contribution, @simonbates! 👍 |
|
Yay!!! Thanks @simonbates and @amb26 for the work that went into this! |
https://issues.gpii.net/browse/GPII-1224
Please note that the code is not yet ready for merging into the main project repository.
This pull request has been created for the purpose of early review.