Merge lp:~tribaal/landscape-client/more-information-on-ssl-errors into lp:~landscape/landscape-client/trunk
Status: | Merged |
---|---|
Approved by: | Chris Glass |
Approved revision: | 811 |
Merged at revision: | 807 |
Proposed branch: | lp:~tribaal/landscape-client/more-information-on-ssl-errors |
Merge into: | lp:~landscape/landscape-client/trunk |
Diff against target: |
291 lines (+141/-19) 8 files modified
landscape/broker/amp.py (+2/-1) landscape/broker/exchange.py (+13/-2) landscape/broker/server.py (+2/-2) landscape/broker/tests/test_amp.py (+1/-1) landscape/broker/tests/test_exchange.py (+39/-2) landscape/broker/tests/test_server.py (+18/-4) landscape/configuration.py (+14/-6) landscape/tests/test_configuration.py (+52/-1) |
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~tribaal/landscape-client/more-information-on-ssl-errors |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Данило Шеган (community) | Approve | ||
Free Ekanayaka (community) | Approve | ||
Review via email: mp+246090@code.launchpad.net |
Commit message
Add a specific error message when the cause of registration failure is an SSL error.
Description of the change
This branch adds a specific error message when the cause of registration failure is an SSL error, since it's a common pitfall for new users, this makes the failure more explicit.
Hopefully, this should put users on the right track when try to report/fix the problem.
It's implemented by simply firing a custom message when the SSL failure is detected, and making the GUI react to this message by printing a more specific error message in this particular case.
How to test:
- Build this branche's packages with "make package", install them on a machine
- Try to register against LDS without specifying an SSL certificate. You should see the new message.
- Try to register against hosted, specifying the LDS's instance certificate. You should see the new message as well.
- Registering using a valid certificate (LDS) or no certificate (hosted) should work.
Looks good, but I'd suggest to not introduce a new event (see below). +1 with that addressed