Skip to content

Conversation

@lawrence-forooghian
Copy link
Collaborator

A few changes to the language in #213, for readability.

@github-actions github-actions bot temporarily deployed to staging/pull/301 April 17, 2025 18:45 Inactive
@lawrence-forooghian lawrence-forooghian marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2025 18:46
@github-actions github-actions bot temporarily deployed to staging/pull/301 April 23, 2025 11:21 Inactive
@lawrence-forooghian
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Oops, forgot that (now-merged) #302 was stacked on top of this PR, so its contents are now here.

For conditional things, consistently say "if it's x, determined by y",
and don't use conditional language for non-conditional REC1b4.
The existing language implies that the primary domain equals the routing
policy name, which is not what the referenced spec points say.
For consistency with REC2c4.
It was being used in two different ways in REC1b3. Per Laura ([1] and
[2]) there is no such thing as a "routing policy name", and the term for
the subcomponent is the "routing policy ID".

[1] https://ably-real-time.slack.com/archives/CURL4U2FP/p1744878569805559
[2] #301 (comment)
I believe it's quite common (e.g. for Realtime devs) to want to point to
a local Realtime. Or, for example in the SDK team, to want to point to a
local reverse proxy for interception.

Turns out that it's already special-cased in ably-go [1], so let's add
to spec.

Since ably-go is the only place that the `endpoint` functionality has
been implemented so far, I'm just changing the existing spec point and
will update ably-go to reflect.

[1] https://github.com/ably/ably-go/blob/17f6575773b28a146ac04bfaf3b8de44ce1ff162/ably/options.go#L506-L510
@lawrence-forooghian lawrence-forooghian merged commit 54e3a6a into main Apr 24, 2025
2 checks passed
@lawrence-forooghian lawrence-forooghian deleted the clarify-nonprod-routing-policy branch April 24, 2025 14:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants