Closed
Bug 1048426
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
callType field in response is set to undefined
Categories
(Hello (Loop) :: Server, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: aoprea, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Whiteboard: [qa+])
Attachments
(1 file)
Response from [0] has callType field set to undefined.
Everything else in the response seems fine [1]
[0]: http://docs.services.mozilla.com/loop/apis.html#get-calls-version-version
[1]: http://imgur.com/T3gEVqG.png
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Possibly related [0] req.callUrlData.callType is undefined but req.body.callType is set to the actual parameter sent in the request.
[0]: https://github.com/mozilla-services/loop-server/blob/master/loop/index.js#L711
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Both standalone and desktop share the same conversation view but they call out different server endpoints. Would it make sense to add `callType` to the response from [0] if it would make reusing the same code easier?
[0] http://docs.services.mozilla.com/loop/apis.html#post-calls-token
Flags: needinfo?(alexis+bugs)
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Andrei Oprea [:andreio] from comment #2)
> Both standalone and desktop share the same conversation view but they call
> out different server endpoints. Would it make sense to add `callType` to the
> response from [0] if it would make reusing the same code easier?
IMHO I don't think so. The callType isn't the only field of difference in the responses, so we'd still need separate handling for the two different endpoints. There could also be potential confusion that in the POST /calls/{token} case, between if its the callType you've just passed to the server, or the call type received from the other end (which, in fact, wouldn't have happened yet).
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
This should fix it!
Attachment #8467851 -
Flags: review?(rhubscher)
Flags: needinfo?(alexis+bugs)
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Updated•10 years ago
|
Attachment #8467851 -
Flags: review?(rhubscher) → review+
Updated•10 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [qa+]
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•