Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

♻️AMP Analytics: Linker and cookie configs added for WebEngage vendor #26785

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 25, 2020
Merged

♻️AMP Analytics: Linker and cookie configs added for WebEngage vendor #26785

merged 5 commits into from
Feb 25, 2020

Conversation

ayushgupta29
Copy link
Contributor

For vendor WebEngage Linker and Cookie configs have been added in order to make sure that the user journey across differently served AMP pages and Non-AMP is synced.

@ayushgupta29 ayushgupta29 requested review from zhouyx and calebcordry and removed request for calebcordry February 13, 2020 10:42
@ayushgupta29
Copy link
Contributor Author

@calebcordry Hey, please review this PR.

@calebcordry
Copy link
Member

@ayushgupta29, I think you want @zhouyx or @micajuine-ho, they are the experts :)

@ayushgupta29
Copy link
Contributor Author

@micajuine-ho Can you please take a look at this again?

@@ -33,6 +33,22 @@ const WEBENGAGE_CONFIG = jsonLiteral({
'request': 'wePageview',
},
},
'linkers': {
'_we_linker': {
'destinationDomains': ['*'],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you sure you want to use this wildcard to match all destination domains?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@micajuine-ho Yes. We have clients who have a lot of domains working with a single license. Otherwise if a visitor switch domains, it would again be counted a new user.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have the same question here. Decorate every outgoing links could potential pass user id information to domains that the client doesn't own.
It can also lead to issues when your vendor setting is used widely, the destination domain could incorrect digest the incoming linker param even the previous domain never intend to decorate the url.

I understand that some clients want to decorate all destination domains to simplify their configurations. In my opinion, we should first recommend them including their domain list. If destinationDomains: ['*'] is needed, I would avoid making that as default.

Please let us know what do you think. Thank you!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@zhouyx Yeah, it kinda makes sense. Since the canonical domain and the source domain is by default included. And if some client requires every outgoing domain to be decorated with linker param then anyway we can override it in the configuration on the frontend.
I have removed the destinationDomains param from the configuration.

Copy link
Contributor

@micajuine-ho micajuine-ho left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, changes LGTM.

Pinging @zhouyx for sanity check before merging.

@ayushgupta29
Copy link
Contributor Author

@zhouyx Can you please do a quick sanity check for this PR and merge?

@zhouyx zhouyx removed the request for review from calebcordry February 24, 2020 18:03
@zhouyx
Copy link
Contributor

zhouyx commented Feb 25, 2020

Thank you @ayushgupta29 LGTM. PR Merged

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants