On 4 November 2015 at 17:52, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ivan Zhakov [mailto:i...@visualsvn.com] >> Sent: woensdag 4 november 2015 15:50 >> To: Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> >> Cc: dev@serf.apache.org >> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1712559 - /serf/trunk/test/test_buckets.c >> >> On 4 November 2015 at 17:47, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: rhuij...@apache.org [mailto:rhuij...@apache.org] >> >> Sent: woensdag 4 november 2015 15:46 >> >> To: dev@serf.apache.org >> >> Subject: svn commit: r1712559 - /serf/trunk/test/test_buckets.c >> >> >> >> Author: rhuijben >> >> Date: Wed Nov 4 14:45:54 2015 >> >> New Revision: 1712559 >> >> >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1712559&view=rev >> >> Log: >> >> * test/test_buckets.c >> >> (test_buckets): Following up on r1712557, remove accidentally added >> test >> >> reference. >> > >> > This was accidentally left from the attached patch that I wrote as one of >> > the >> options to properly handle 100 and 101 status codes. (Followup on an irc >> discussion yesterday) >> > >> > Patch attached. >> > >> I don't see patch attached. > > I do see the attachment, but perhaps the list filters it and gmail just shows > me whatever I sent. > > The attachment is also on > https://lpt1.nl/f/2015/201511-serf-1xx-responses.patch > I was thinking about the same approach first (teaching response bucket handle 1xx responses), but currently I am inclined that interim responses should be separate response bucket instances handled via separate callback, if serf API users is going to handle them.
-- Ivan Zhakov
