> From the user's point of view, I wouldn't call it "the right
> thing". We're not showing her a page even though we have the
> data.
and
> anyway, I'm ok with this removal. just saying it's not clear that
> it's the right thing.
We _are_ showing her the page. That's why the test points to "fail.html", because we loaded/displayed an expired, cached page. The removal does not block that behavior, only allows local connections prior to that.
> This patch will still not allow you to connect to "localhost"
> when offline, right? Just to ::1/127.0.0.1
It could connect to "localhost" through a local proxy (why the tests were failing before), but otherwise it won't. If you connected to "localhost" recently before going offline, it will load a cached copy.
Created attachment 660621
Prepare for checkin
Pushed to try: /tbpl.mozilla. org/?tree= Try&rev= 2b84bacf7276
https:/
> From the user's point of view, I wouldn't call it "the right
> thing". We're not showing her a page even though we have the
> data.
and
> anyway, I'm ok with this removal. just saying it's not clear that
> it's the right thing.
We _are_ showing her the page. That's why the test points to "fail.html", because we loaded/displayed an expired, cached page. The removal does not block that behavior, only allows local connections prior to that.
> This patch will still not allow you to connect to "localhost"
> when offline, right? Just to ::1/127.0.0.1
It could connect to "localhost" through a local proxy (why the tests were failing before), but otherwise it won't. If you connected to "localhost" recently before going offline, it will load a cached copy.