Skip to content

Propossal for SDK without AMS #434

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

Closed
wants to merge 11 commits into from

Conversation

elopezanaya
Copy link
Contributor

@elopezanaya elopezanaya commented Mar 23, 2025

PR Details

Thank you for your contribution. Before submitting this PR, please include:

Id of the task, bug, story or other reference

Description

Include a description of the problem to be solved

There are some customer that doesnt support attachment scenarios as part of their business cases, but the SDK is loading either way if is used or not.

The load of AMS is one of the most expensive during initialization ,, so there is no point to impose this component when is not in use.

Solution Proposed

Detail what is the solution proposed, include links to design document if required or any other document required to support the solution

Offer the option for customers to opt out to load AMS client during initialization, and offer an after load option to enable /disable the AMS client taking control over attachment operation such as upload /download.

This will also provide flexibility for customers to decide when to add AMS in case they need it.

Acceptance criteria

Define what are the conditions to consider the PR has achieved the intended goal

Test cases and evidence

Include what tests cases were considered, any evidence of testing for future references, to identify any corner cases, etc

Config for Customer and Agent Disabled : Dont load AMS

image

Agent allowed but no customer

image

Customer enabled, load iframe

image

Sanity Tests

  • You have tested all changes in Popout mode
  • You have tested all changes in cross browsers i.e Edge, Chrome, Firefox, Safari and mobile devices(iOS and Android)
  • Your changes are included in the CHANGELOG

A11y

Please provide justification if any of the validations has been skipped.

@elopezanaya elopezanaya changed the title Light sdk ams Propossal for SDK without AMS Mar 23, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant