Hardware, platform and safety / Offline-first architecture
Where does “The launcher's one opening request” fit in Simca, in particular regarding network address visible to the host?
Designed in a document, no code yet C0249
ADR-0003: the launcher has no account. When it is opened and connected it makes a single plain GET of a signed static update manifest. The request carries no account data and no identifier, there are no timers or background services, and the notice that results is dismissible. Like any web request it reveals the network address and the time to whoever serves the file, so the source is configurable (including a community mirror or none). The library tests count requests: one when enabled, zero when disabled or before the disclosure is answered. Plan for: network address visible to the host; manifest source is configurable; setting to disable the request. It is designed in a document and no code exists.
How to read this
The tag above says how real the answer is. Answers describe the plan in the repository and design documents. No app is released. Where an answer touches tax or law, treat it as a theme to verify with a qualified local adviser.
More in Offline-first architecture
- What goes wrong with “Offline guard tests” in a shop, thinking about new dependencies need an allowlist entry?
- Which edge cases come up around “The launcher has no account”, thinking about offline mode governs the app only?
- Where does “Simca's own launcher, forked from an earlier private one” fit in Simca, especially around reuse terms of the source not confirmed?
- See it in context with the whole topic
- Search all answers