[rfc][icedtea-web] PolicyEditor gains a real parser

[Andrew Azores]

On 30/04/15 07:49 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> ...snip...
> This is cool stuff!
>
> I like the ideas inside. however...
>
> Several issues with user experience popped up which should be fixed:
>
> When you start jsut prefix/bin/policyeditor with no args, then it 
> immediately complains about :can not open file"
>  - imho it should not complain:)
>   I see two possibilities - open default file (but it may be tricky), 
> or work on no file, and then inform (it was like that, wasn't it? I'm 
> for this one...)
>
> when you open "no file" then save as(or open file later ) then saving 
> is popuping many errors.. and file seems to not be saved
>
> opening of default file seems to be doing noting (or the app is saving 
> the file  strangly)
>
> save is broken "the file was not on disk, creating new" -> saved -> 
> :error during saving" Some save dialogue missing perhaps??
>
> (whole this saving/laoding seems to be completly broken - you can open 
> file but hte content do not repalce and so on... Also is this 
> changeset counting with "open default file" afaik not)

I think this has been fixed by a different changeset... trying the same 
patch earlier today seems to have worked fine.

>
> escape button (and cross in dialogue)  from that dialogue with 
> codebasese/principals/signedby... is annoying with forcing to fill 
> something in. Afaik The cross/ecape button should be related to 
> cancel. Not ok :)

Oops, fixed I think.

>
> I can see you have added modify codebas/signed/principals as three 
> separate menu entries. its good and +1 for keeping it. But what about 
> general "modify?  Also hitting "remove" is pretty simple... One may 
> regret hitting it by accident. As the " 'add new' dialogue" is the 
> only good viwer - then what about this : instead of "remove" put 
> "view" button here, which allwos general modification and/or removal.

I've added a confirmation on hitting "remove". Personally I think it 
would be a little bit more difficult to figure out how to remove entries 
if it's hidden within the "modify" functionality. I like the idea of 
using the "Add New" dialog as also a viewer though... but as that's just 
a UI tweak and not functional, can it be put off for a later changeset?

>
> the to string used in list is nasty :) I think it can safel ignore 
> (notshow) unspeciffied fields.
> so policy without principals and with null signedBy will show only  
> codeabase.  and so on.. Jsut dont show unspecified.

Fixed. It does look much nicer this way!

>
> Al above seems serious enough to be fixed before push.
>
> Maybe "view filter" - "clever" "all" "selected" + checkboxes like 
> codebase/principals/signed by - but this can go as another changeset
>
> Maybe also the "general modify button" can go as another changeset.
>
> One question - how it behaves/should behave when only one (or two)  
> from codebase signedby principals are specified?
>
> I was not able to try it, because I was not able to save/load my 
> changes (related to above)
>   in case of selection I'm probably for "choose first matching"
>   in case of creating new one - it is pretty clear.
>      Teh issue is rising, when some partially amtching is already 
> found. Then it should update it?

Right now it just looks for exact matches. If no exact match exists then 
it creates a new entry with the specified attributes. If a match does 
exist then it simply selects it in the UI but no changes are made to the 
entry's properties.

>
> Now - when run in sandbox is used - only codebase is sent to policy 
> editor - isnt better to sent also prinsipals and signed by? afaik you 
> know them both in this time...
>

The temporary permissions button calls a factory method and receives a 
PolicyEditor instance, and then on that instance it calls addNewEntry, 
which takes a PolicyIdentifier. So this way the security dialog is able 
to send all relevant applet identification details to the PolicyEditor 
instance.

> Also I think run in sandbox is now broken, because applications which 
> depends on reflection, but were working in sadnbox (with reflection on 
> - like geogebra) now dont work.

Very odd. Are you sure that it's this patch that breaks them? If you 
haven't already tested to verify this then I can do so later on.

>
>
>
> Hoping to see this in soon, but as it is, is broken
>
>
>   J.
>


-- 
Thanks,

Andrew Azores

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: policyeditor-real-parser-6.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 257967 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20150604/8f626547/policyeditor-real-parser-6-0001.patch>