On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 12:48 +0200, Roland Weber wrote: > Hi Oleg, > > >> HttpState: > >> We've talked about that during the High Level Design. > >> It's good enough for alpha1, but should be split into > >> it's different aspects afterwards. > > > > I do think it is _really_ important to get ALPHA1 release out rather > > sooner then later. Port of HttpClient to HttpCore is a massive change by > > itself and is intended to address the most severe architectural issues > > with HttpClient. HttpState is somewhat ugly but not utterly broken the > > same way HttpMethod / HttpMethodBase are. Therefore I would rather have > > more test cases ported from 3.1 to 4.0 API and get the new framework > > reasonably tested and stable and only then get down to fixing > > non-critical aspects such as the HTTP state management API. > > Agreed. > > > What remains to be done for ALPHA1 in HttpConn? > > Use of HttpParams and test coverage, as far as I remember. > The gaping holes I left were in HttpClient. Fixing those > might of course expose omissions in the HttpConn API. > > cheers, > Roland >
Hi Roland, I am currently working on a reverse proxy example based on HttpCore NIO. Once it is done I could put HttpCore on the back burner for a while and turn my attention to HttpClient. Would you have any spare cycles for HttpComponents in May? Cheers, Oleg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
