Started using device registration URI from patron authentication document #255
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Is this actually still relevant? The platform has been updated multiple times since this was submitted. |
|
@io7m hmm, you're right. If there's a more recent version of the platform then this is not needed. However, I'll use and adapt this for my next PR :D |
…feature/update-libraries-version
nunommts
changed the title
|
@io7m it's ready for review 😄 |
io7m
reviewed
Nov 10, 2023
simplified-notifications/src/main/java/NotificationTokenHTTPCalls.kt
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
io7m
requested changes
Nov 10, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What's this do?
This PR adds logic to use the device registration URI, if any, on the patron authentication document instead of having it hardcoded. It also changes the notification http calls to be done on a background thread.
Why are we doing this? (w/ JIRA link if applicable)
There's a feature request to implement this now the backend supports it and there's a bug report saying the notification http calls are being called in the main thread.
How should this be tested? / Do these changes have associated tests?
Open the Palace app in two different devices
Logout and login (or just log in if you were not authenticated) from any library (but it has to be the same) on both devices
With one account borrow a book that only has on copy
With the other account, reserve the same book
Again with the first account, return the book
Confirm a push notification is received in the second account
Dependencies for merging? Releasing to production?
None
Have you updated the changelog?
Yes
Has the application documentation been updated for these changes?
No
Did someone actually run this code to verify it works?
Tested by @nunommts