1000202 - [UX] Desktop client needs expired URL notification

Status: RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

(Hello (Loop) :: Client, enhancement, P2)

Comment 1

[Maire Reavy [:mreavy]]

Romain -- What is the difference between this and Bug 1000131?

Comment 2

[Romain Testard [:RT]]

This bug addresses the link clicker scenario on Firefox (client UI) whereas 1000131 addresses the link clicker scenario on third party browsers.
Both depend on 1000216 (expire URLs after a given amount of time).

Comment 3

[Darrin Henein [:darrin]]

Will we know the difference between expired/404/revoked?

I am writing the copy to be generic for now (URL Unavailable). Let me know if it should be otherwise.

Comment 4

[Rémy Hubscher (:natim)]

For now there is no differences between expired or revoked which both answer `400 — Invalid token.`
In the future we will have call url stored on the database, we should then have 410 — Gone for expired and revoked.

Revoked should just be an earlier expiration asked by the url initiator.

Comment 5

[Romain Testard [:RT]]

I think for MVP we should have a unique message to the user - the same for expired or revoked.
It also provides more privacy around your decision to revoke a URL - as a user you don't want to be called on that URL anymore and maybe you don't want the link clicker to know it (similar to "I show as offline on your contact list if I block you but you have no idea I blocked you".

Comment 6

[Romain Testard [:RT]]

Lowering priority given this depends on us supporting the desktop client UI for handling URL call-backs.

Comment 7

[:shell escalante]

UI: https://people.mozilla.org/~dhenein/labs/loop-mvp-spec/#start-call-unavailable

Comment 8

[:shell escalante]

Hi Niko, you just checked in 1000131 for the link clicker.  Is this one close/can code be re-used since it's the same error just on desktop side?

Comment 9

[Nicolas Perriault (:NiKo`) — needinfo me if you need my attention]

(In reply to sescalante from comment #8)
> Hi Niko, you just checked in 1000131 for the link clicker.  Is this one
> close/can code be re-used since it's the same error just on desktop side?

What error are we precisely talking about? Desktop client wasn't impacted by the bug are they're not sharing the same failure handler… Did you have any report of a broken desktop client?

Comment 10

[:shell escalante]

doh. i read Niko's comments and the User story here and realized this is a pure dupe.  he fixed for link clicker - on FireFox or other browsers.  sorry for not reading the bug 1000131 closer.

Comment 12

[Romain Testard [:RT]]

Re-opening this bug
This bug is for desktop client UI whereas bug 1000131 is about standalone UI.

Comment 13

[u279076]

Paul, can you please test this once it's resolved as a continuation of your work in bug 1000131?

Comment 14

[Paul Silaghi, QA [:pauly]]

Sure

Comment 15

[:shell escalante]

Hi Paul,  were you able to verify if you saw the expired notification on the desktop client as well?

Comment 16

[Paul Silaghi, QA [:pauly]]

In order to test this, any idea how to force a Loop URL to expire?

Comment 17

[u279076]

(In reply to Paul Silaghi, QA [:pauly] from comment #16)
> In order to test this, any idea how to force a Loop URL to expire?

Mark, could you help us out?

Comment 18

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

I don't understand why we're trying to test this bug - this is about an as yet unimplemented feature - being able to handle link-clicks in the conversation window if loading them in Firefox (rather than having them in a tab).

Comment 19

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Closing as incomplete for now. When we get to implementing bug 1066019 we'll be doing a fresh breakdown and either re-opening the bugs that block it, or filing new bugs depending on how we plan to do the technical implementation.