<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-06-10, 7:05 AM, Maxim Nazarenko
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAKGkX-2=WnTg=612kzwBWxitiu9m4Ws4Oq_bhHmk5-QUBGSUrw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Good morning!<br>
<br>
</div>
I suspect we might use machine-readable date format (like
YYYYMMDD) to keep the corresponding code cleaner, since it
is mostly internal anyway.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yan has been talking about using subversions of the extension
release version for the ruleset releases. That way we can easily
compare version types using the nsIVersionComparator XPCOM class and
have the heavy lifting done for us. We'll leave a date field in the
update object, but it would just be something there to present to
users so they can be informed when their most recent ruleset update
was.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAKGkX-2=WnTg=612kzwBWxitiu9m4Ws4Oq_bhHmk5-QUBGSUrw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Best regards,<br>
</div>
Maxim Nazarenko<br>
<br>
</div>
P.S. Looks like this email was private... Is it intentional? I
suppose it should be tossed to the mailing list.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Making the email private was my mistake. Thunderbird isn't quite
clever enough to put the mailing list in the reply-to section of my
responses, it seems.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAKGkX-2=WnTg=612kzwBWxitiu9m4Ws4Oq_bhHmk5-QUBGSUrw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On 9 June 2014 19:11, Red <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:redwire@riseup.net" target="_blank">redwire@riseup.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">On 2014-06-09, 12:28 PM, Maxim Nazarenko
wrote:<br>
> Actually, I believe we can have _several_ "update"
objects stored in a<br>
> _single_ update JSON file (in an array may be? My
JSON is not fluent).<br>
> The extension then will download the appropriate
rulseset, this choice<br>
> may be either hardcoded or set via (hidden) prefs.<br>
> PROS: Less hassle with signing and distribution.<br>
> CONS: Transfer overhead. No secret ruleset flavors
^_^<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
> Maxim Nazarenko<br>
</div>
Oh, you're exactly right! I completely forgot JSON allows
arrays. In<br>
that case, we could have a structure like<br>
{<br>
"updates": [<br>
{<br>
"branch" : "development",<br>
"date" : "09 June, 2014",<br>
...<br>
},<br>
{<br>
"branch" : "stable",<br>
"date" : "21 July, 2014",<br>
...<br>
}<br>
],<br>
"updates_signature" : ...<br>
}<br>
couldn't we? That's a much better suggestion, Maxim!
Thanks!<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yan has also stated in her comment
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://gist.github.com/redwire/2e1d8377ea58e43edb40#comment-1242761">https://gist.github.com/redwire/2e1d8377ea58e43edb40#comment-1242761</a>)
that she feels it might still be better to take the approach of
releasing several different update.json files corresponding to
different extension release types.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>