First of all, what you are complaining about is a pretty, pretty small fraction of the overall login solution.
For that fraction, the design is to back to the original url after user login from a session timeout.
Shaohe's current implementation works well. what zhengsheng means is about how to improve it.

On 6/13/2014 3:12 PM, Zhou Zheng Sheng wrote:

If I remembered correctly, Shao He, Yu Xin and me had several long talks
on the login design. This solution is not the solution we agreed, and
all of us thought that this solution is ugly and obviously should be
improved.

We have ever discussed several options, but we have not converged to a certain one.
Let me continue to read to see what the 'ugly' you mean.

This solution works very well, it can always be improved.


The problem is on how it redirects the user back to the previous page
after login. In this patch, the back-end has to intercepts each access
to any of the ".html" page, and sets
  cookie['lastPage'] = current page URI,
and return it to front-end, then the front-end sends this cookie to
back-end in every query, including AJAX query. When the session expires,
the back-end redirects the front-end to a login page, after login
successfully, the back-end gets cookie['lastPage'], at last, redirect
the user to the last page.

Just to implement returning to the previous page afte login, the
back-end has to intercept each '.html' access and sets cookie, and the
front-end has to send the cookie in each request including AJAX ones.

Handling cookie back and forth is done by browser and web container. There will be always cookie, this is not an additional overhead.
What shaohe does is only to get the current tab url. That is a quite small amount of code.


So in the last talk we agreed that a simpler and more effective solution
should be used. We at least have two alternative solutions.

1. When session is expired, we redirect the user to login.html. After
login successfully, the JS script in the front-end asks the browser to
go back to the previous page. Since the browser keeps a stack of page
histories, it should be easy to do this.

This is server side redirect after form is submitted, at that time, client side has no code to run.
Server side redirect browser directly to last page in login response, quite straight-forward.

I do not think brower history will be a reliable solution.
http://www.w3schools.com/js/js_window_history.asp


2. When the back-end detects the session is expired or the user hasn't
login yet, it uses internal redirect to present the "login.html". From
the front-end point of view, an unauthenticated access to "GET
#tabs/vms.html" returns "login.html". After the user input his/her
password in the "login.html" and click "login", the back-end receives
the request, if the password is correct, it returns a "refresh.html". In
"refresh.html" there is actually a small JS code to ask the browser to
refresh the page. Since we are using internal redirect all the time, the
page URI in the browser remains "#tabs/vms.html", so after the login,
just refreshing the page would lead user to the real "vms.html.tmpl".

In the above two solutions, no ugly cookie is needed for each request
and response, and the back-end doesn't have to intercept each ".html"
access, but just has to intercept each unauthenticated access.

internal redirect will make browser url mismatch with the content.
the current design will always keep url address its intended content, this is a virtue over internal redirect we should pursue.

The ugly cookie is removed, but introduced a much uglier "refresh.html" and code in that html.
To me, it is much more complicated.


I don't know why Yu Xin and Shao He sent the to-be-abandoned solution
again to the mailing list. Patches were sent on 20:00 Chinese local
time, the patches got merged in 05:00 Chinese local time in the next
day. There is no other developer gets CCed. There is no reviewed-by.

This is not to-be-abandoned solution. Adam, Aline, Shao He and I have discussed this in a team meeting.
It is sent to mail list. all people subscribed to mail list should get it.
It is already V5, it is reviewed enough.


After talked to Shao He this morning, he told me that we determined to
defer this feature/task to seek a better solution. Shao He told me that
they sent the patch as RFC, not aim to be a final solution. However it
is a big misleading to other developers because there is no RFC in the
patch title. There is even no reviewed-by. Is there any reason to merge
it so hurry?

This is already V5, how can it be an RFC?


If there was any time and task pressure, I think as an open source
project, the progress should have some flexibility. We should not write
code for a known broken solution, while there is obvious alternative
solutions. This is very different from incremental development. In
incremental development, the direction and the solution is correct, we
just completes the missing pieces step by step. In this case, the
solution and the framework itself is not so effective. Once it's merged,
we started to rely on this, and changing and improving it would be much
harder.

Speed will always be most key to succeed for any organization.
There is nothing broken, it works well.
Improvement will never stop.

Again, the overall solution is discussed across whole team in one of the Wed's team meeting.
Cookie is the best way to store previousPage to reserve user context. If anyone see a better way than cookie for this issue, welcome to discuss with me.

As zhengsheng point out, we need to try to improve that small bit of code to store previousPage into cookie. but again, it works well currently.
But obviously, that is far from a justification to stop this patch from being merged.


on 2014/06/13 05:50, Aline Manera wrote:

Applied. Thanks.

Regards,

Aline Manera

_______________________________________________
Kimchi-devel mailing list
Kimchi-devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/kimchi-devel