Advice request on how to handle change in how Konqueror stores login information

[Steven Robbins]

On Monday, September 23, 2024 12:33:40 A.M. CDT Stefano Crocco wrote:
> On domenica 22 settembre 2024 23:53:33 CEST Steven Robbins wrote:

> > The way I understood that suggestion is that there is NOT a one-time
> > migration.  Rather, the algorithm when encountering a page with forms is
> > roughly:
> > 
> > 1. look up the new way - if entry found, then use it; else
> > 2. look up the old way - if entry found, then
> > 
> >    a) migrate to new storage
> >    b) use data to fill form
> > 
> > So it would be a gradual migration.  If the data is found under the old
> > scheme, then for migration (Step 2a) I would think you have enough info to
> > build an unambiguous key for the new scheme?
> 
> I certainly have the information to build the new keys, but sometimes
> (rarely) there's not enough information to associate the existing data with
> the correct key. If the old data is under the key http://xyz.com# and the
> page has two forms, with entries http://xyz.com#f1 and http://xyz.com#f2,
> what should I do with the existing entry? Rename it as http://xyz.com#f1?
> Rename it as http://xyz.com#f2? Create two entries, http://xyz.com#f2 and
> http://xyz.com#f2 with the same contents?

This is where I'm confused about the question .... 

What does the current code do in such a situation?  Does it fill out form f1?  
f2?  both?  neither?

I was assuming the new code could do the analogous thing and be "no less 
robust".  Perhaps that is what you meant by the paragraph below.  

> The last one is what I thought
> you meant: it keeps the ambiguity because it doesn't attempt to decide
> which form the entry corresponds to but uses it for all of them, leaving it
> to the user to correct things. In many circumstances, there are ways to
> attempt to determine a single entry, but in some edge cases they could
> fail. This is why I thought that having the user start the process would be
> better.

If I understand correctly, the answer is that the current code will fill out 
*both* forms f1 and f2 and let the user correct them?  If you retain this 
behaviour then it would at least be familiar :-)  

Can you then migrate to the new structure after the user corrects and submits 
the form?

I'm clearly way out of my depth here, but I have enjoyed the discussion.

Thanks,
-Steve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-devel/attachments/20240925/8541e97a/attachment.sig>