Make uProxy actually proxy again

[keroserene]

No description provided.

[keroserene]

When signals need to be passed from socks-rtc through uProxy to XMPP, it contains a peerId, which needs to map to a Core.RemoteInstance with absolute certainty. So, peerId actually needs to be an :InstancePath of some sort, rather than just an instanceId which is insufficient. We can concatenate the InstancePath with a special character. The specialness of this character is easy to guarantee for network name and instanceId, but not necessarily userId. Still, '#' is good enough for now.

So, the peerId will look something like network#userId#instanceId. This work is currently in progress.

[keroserene]

Update: peerId is now just a JSON.stringify of an :InstancePath, since it is allowed to be an arbritrary string

[dborkan]

uProxy now proxies again, as of pull request #120

[ryscheng]

Awesome! Any particular instructions before I build a crx for the webstore?

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:35 AM, dborkan notifications@github.com wrote:

Closed #95 #95.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/95#event-121121615
.

[keroserene]

I believe we should not build a crx for the webstore quite yet. There are still other stability issues, and a lot of documentation to write before we go to dogfood & beyond. :)

+@iislucas +@scouttle

[scouttle]

W00t! 😺

On "other stability issues": would you be so kind as to 1) confirm that each has a GitHub issue describing it (& user-visible problem), and 2) that all the issues you envision as being dogfooder-blocking are targeted at the appropriate milestone?

That will help us determine whether any of said issues might, perhaps, be tolerable to our highly-bug-tolerant first group of technical dogfooders, such that we can share with them sooner rather than later. (We're explicitly be recruiting bleeding-edge enthusiasts... they'll be disappointed if things are too polished!)

Also... documentation for whom? (If user-facing, I'm ready to help!)

[iislucas]

We have an restricted webstore enrty for uProxy; Ray can update that. That
will help Scout write instructions on installation for dog-fooders; who,
once we know who they are, we can add to the list of allowed users on the
Chrome Webstore.

btw - Ray: please make sure the webstore entry for uProxy is not restricted
by only a hidden URL - wouldn't want the URL leaked by accident. :)

cheers,
lucas

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:58 PM, scouttle notifications@github.com wrote:

W00t! [image: 😺]

On "other stability issues": would you be so kind as to 1) confirm that
each has a GitHub issue describing it (& user-visible problem), and 2) that
all the issues you envision as being dogfooder-blocking are targeted at the appropriate
milestone https://github.com/uProxy/uProxy/issues?milestone=4&state=open?

That will help us determine whether any of said issues might, perhaps, be
tolerable to our highly-bug-tolerant first group of technical dogfooders,
such that we can share with them sooner rather than later. (We're
explicitly be recruiting bleeding-edge enthusiasts... they'll be
disappointed if things are too polished!)

Also... documentation for whom? (If user-facing, I'm ready to help!)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/95#issuecomment-43122569
.

Lucas Dixon | Google Ideas