On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 17:17 +0100, Thorsten Scherler wrote: > On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 11:10 -0500, Ryan McKinley wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > I would like to start working on a HttpClient 4.0 based implementation > > > of the ProtocolHandler as the next step. I would like to ask a few > > > questions before get down to coding > > > > > > (1) Would anyone object to using URI class instead of URL in the > > > Droids > > > public API? We ought not use URL class unless we are planning to use > > > it > > > to retrieve the content that location is pointing at. We have our own > > > content retrieval abstraction, namely ProtocolHandler. URL class seems > > > unnecessary. This would also help keep consistency with HttpClient 4.0 > > > API > > > > Agreed, URI is better. Also, the Link API uses getURI() > > > > > > > > (2) Should I keep the existing HttpBase and Http classes? > > > > > > > For now, I think you should design what you think the best interface > > will be. If it matches the HttpBase & Http class, then great -- > > otherwise it can and should change. > >
Ryan, Thorsten It is more of a question whether you want Droids to have no hard dependency on HttpClient 4.0. Otherwise, I do not see a lot of value in keeping these classes Oleg > +1 > > totally agree. > > salu2
