Excellent! Thanks. Should I just open Jiras and attach my patches?
Thanks, Jeff Mark wrote: > OK. I have checked in mina-filter-codec-http, mina-protocol-client-http and > mina-protocol-server-http into the trunk. There is still a lot of > commenting that needs to be done, but at least the code in in the baseline > and people can start working it. Please let me know what more we need from > a code perspective. I will work on the javadoc stuff more tonight. > > One piece I am not sure about is what needs to be done in order to get the > new sub-projects integrated into the developer directions for working on > multiple branches in the same Eclipse workspace: > http://mina.apache.org/developer-guide.html#DeveloperGuide-WorkingwithMultipleBranchesinOneEclipseWorkspace > > > On 8/27/07, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I am currently working on the HTTP client piece. Check back later in the >> day for an update. I will respond to this thread with further information. >> >> >> -- >> ..Cheers >> Mark >> >> On 8/27/07, Kevin Smeltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Nice! >>> >>> I'm in the latter stages ( or so I say ) of development of a massive >>> multiplayer game that is distributed via an Applet. >>> >>> I have been wondering about using TCP/IP for all data transmission >>> from client to server and vice versa, but there may be problems with >>> people who are playing the game in an applet. >>> >>> Also, applets can only connect to the domain that served the page using >>> TCP/IP. >>> >>> But using HTTP as a transport would hopefully bypass those two problems. >>> >>> And that would be awesome! :-D >>> >>> Kevin >>> >>> On 8/27/07, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Kevin Smeltzer wrote: >>>>> Is this a project for doing transfer through HTTP using Mina? If so >>> it >>>>> could be very valuable (to me anyways) :-D >>>> Yep ;-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 8/27/07, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> I have been moving things around, creating the 3 separate >>> subprojects. >>>>>> Everything is compiling and seems to be in good shape. I posted a >>> question >>>>>> to the list a couple days ago about javadocs at the class level and >>> have not >>>>>> heard back. Maybe your email and mine will bump this thread and >>> someone can >>>>>> answer my question. >>>>>> >>>>>> Either way, I will check in what I have tonight. I'm on EST.... >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ..Cheers >>>>>> Mark >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8/27/07, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>>> Any status on where we are at with this? I have patches I want to >>> start >>>>>>> delivering ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jeff >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mike Heath wrote: >>>>>>>> I don't want to hold up moving this code over. If/when we decide >>> to put >>>>>>>> it on a different release schedule, moving the module over to a >>>>>>>> 'commons' repo or something similar will be trivial. So, for the >>> time >>>>>>>> being, I would be fine if we moved asynchronous http client into >>> MINA as >>>>>>>> a module. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm eager to play with this client and I'm very eager to look >>> into using >>>>>>>> it to create asynchronous web service calls. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Mike >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mark wrote: >>>>>>>>> I like Trustin's three module ideas as well. I also think Mike >>> has a >>>>>>>>> valid >>>>>>>>> concern on the release schedule. I would rather get a consensus >>> on >>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>> before we move forward. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 8/23/07, Cameron Taggart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I liked Trustin's three module idea: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * mina-filter-codec-http <-- common code >>>>>>>>>> * mina-protocol-server-http <-- asyncweb imported here >>>>>>>>>> * mina-protocol-client-http <-- AsyncHttpClient imported here >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Can it be decided later, after the import, whether it should >>> be on >>>>>>>>>> the same release cycle as MINA!? Apache Felix has components >>> such as >>>>>>>>>> their "commons" on a different release schedule. I think MINA >>> could >>>>>>>>>> do the same if needed. The most important thing I think is to >>> get the >>>>>>>>>> code imported right now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cameron >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 8/23/07, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> based on Mike's comments, I am not sure where we want to go >>> with all >>>>>>>>>> this. >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/22/07, Jeff Genender < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Mike and Mark, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I did my final commits. Feel free to grab the code. I will >>> hold on >>>>>>>>>>>> further development until it hits the Mina repo. You can >>> find it >>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>> here: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/AsyncHttpClient/ >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jeff >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Heath wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Trustin Lee wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We might be able to extract common codec from both server >>> and >>>>>>>>>> client >>>>>>>>>>>>>> side into a separate module and let two depend on it, >>> resulting >>>>>>>>>> three >>>>>>>>>>>>>> submodules in total: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * mina-filter-codec-http >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * mina-protocol-server-http >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * mina-protocol-client-http >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wdty? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trustin >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you suggesting making the above sub-modules part of MINA >>>>>>>>>> itself? I >>>>>>>>>>>>> don't like this idea as stated in my previous messages. I >>> don't >>>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>>> tying the release of MINA to the release of HTTP protocol >>> handlers >>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>> vice versa. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I very much like the idea of extracting common functionality >>>>>>> between >>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>>>> HTTP server and HTTP client and having both the client and >>> server >>>>>>>>>> depend >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the common module. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> After giving it a lot of thought, I'm of the opinion more >>> now than >>>>>>>>>> ever >>>>>>>>>>>>> that we should make async-httpclient part of AsyncWeb. They >>> have >>>>>>>>>> too >>>>>>>>>>>>> much in common to keep them separate IMO. There's no reason >>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>> AsyncWeb should be a server only project and IIRC, there >>> were plans >>>>>>>>>> made >>>>>>>>>>>>> a while ago to create a client for AsyncWeb. Such a move >>> would >>>>>>> also >>>>>>>>>>>>> give us a good incentive to finally get AsyncWeb migrated >>> over to >>>>>>>>>> MINA. >>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -Mike >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> ..Cheers >>>>>>>>>>> Mark >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> > >
