On Thursday, June 12, 2003, at 07:51 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
Adrian,
I whole-heartedly support the idea of developing a suite of unit tests
dedicated to the proxied HTTP communication. The only catch here is that
such test cases would require a full blown proxy server. There seems to
be no way around it. In order to be able to test proxy related stuff I
ended up setting up a local 'squid' server. It was a major pain in the
rear to get it configured properly. So, decent documentation of the
entire process will be paramount. Somebody would also have to set up MS
proxy server, as it often happens to be causing specific problems,
especially related to NTLM authentication.
Yes, we should document those steps well so more people have proxy testing setups available. We should also write test stubs that pretend to be proxy servers as that would catch most of the NTLM bugs we've seen since it would be able to test that the connection stays open.
How is your committer agreement shaping up? I would really LOVE to see
that damn SSL guide massaged a bit and finally deployed on our web site.
Well, two days ago I had approval from the chairman of the board and was waiting for the documentation to come through. Now I'm waiting on an evaluation from our US legal firm so I don't really know what's going on or how long it's going to take. I do apologize for the trouble involved, hopefully our legal firm will be in touch with software development practices and put an end to this farce.
As for the SSL guide, I'd just commit it as is and deploy it. It's good enough that it will be useful to people and I can do the cleanup work on it when this all gets sorted out to make it a little easier to read and make it fit in with the same style as the rest of our documentation.
Oleg
Regards,
Adrian Sutton.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
