Hmmm... Problem is not timing out is a security hole. Is this
anything more serious than a change to rails config?
-h
Matt Wagner <matt.wagner(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi folks,
The other day,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794536 was
entered -- "conductor should have an inactivity timeout."
I only noticed it after it was pushed, and I remarked on IRC that it
sounded more like an irritant than a good feature. Further, I suggested
that it was a new feature, not a bug, so it didn't belong in this
sprint. It sounded like there was some consensus on at least the second
point, but more in a "going forward" sense than in relation to this
specific bugfix.
I just noticed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798960 as I
was packing up for the day, which is marked as an urgent bug that is
wreaking havoc on QE. While it's a legitimate bug, it seems like it's
directly caused by the patch in #794536.
At the risk of sounding like a curmudgeon, I would propose that we
should revert the patch for 794536. The patch itself was good, but its
inclusion was out-of-scope for the sprint, and it's now causing a
high-priority bug.
Thoughts?
-- Matt
Hrm why is the inactivity timeout causing issues w/ QE? Do any of the
automated tests incorporate a delay > 15 minutes?
Regardless, would tailoring the behaviour to the rails environment solve
the issue? eg. when running the app in 'production' we incorporate this
time out where as it is disabled in the 'test' environment.
-Mo