Looked quickly at cometd and especially cometd-java. It looks to me that this is trivial to include in the http service implementation. Will look into this.
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Sten Roger Sandvik <s...@x3m.com> wrote: > The new http service is not testet alot. It's only been used in our own > projects for now, but I will need to create more unit tests and some > integration tests. As for comet support - I have tought of it, but have not > come around to do it. I will gladly look at the "current" comet support to > see if it's a trivial ting to include. > > Yes, it would be great to be included as a committer. I really like the > Felix project and are really committed to create the best http service > implementation out there :-) > > BR, > Sten Roger > > > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Rob Walker <r...@ascert.com> wrote: > >> Good point - we also have a "home grown" cometd approach which we use for >> server push to our GWT application, so something built into the http server >> would definitely be of interest >> - R >> >> >> Clement Escoffier wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Just my 2 cents. >>> any plan to support Cometd ? >>> >>> We slightly change the current HTTP Service to support Cometd. I don't >>> see any issue to do the same on Sten's version. >>> (of course, I can send what we quickly did). >>> >>> >>> As a reminder, Cometd is an HTTP based MOM, allowing (after a handshake) >>> a server to notify browser. In Ajax-based interaction, the client >>> (periodically) query the server. With Comet, the server notifies the >>> clients. >>> As you can imagine, this is definitely important for dynamic web >>> application. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Clement >>> >>> >>> On 28.08.2009, at 08:40, Rob Walker wrote: >>> >>> What do we need to do make this happen guys? >>>> >>>> Sten - sounds like you've done a great job, kudos. >>>> >>>> Felix/Marcel - sounds like you guys are happy with the approach and code >>>> >>>> >From our side, we can certainly run some "real world" compatibility >>>> tests - which isn't to say in fact that Sten's new service would be wrong >>>> and the current one right, just whether thenew version breaks anything >>>> present in the exisiting service. If it does, I'm sure it'll either be >>>> fixable, or something that's actually not correct in the current service - >>>> so not a major issue. It'll be useful though to be able to advise other >>>> Felix guys of anything that might differ and need application changes. I'm >>>> happy to make time to look at this next week. >>>> >>>> After that - do we just call a vote? I'm guessing Sten, we also need to >>>> propose you as a committter for maintenance? >>>> >>>> Great progress though - the current Http service has served us pretty >>>> well, but it's always been on the list to have cleaner and fuller solution >>>> >>>> -- Rob >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> -- >> >> >> Ascert - Taking systems to the Edge >> r...@ascert.com >> +44 (0)20 7488 3470 >> www.ascert.com >> >> >
