RE: Question and comment about 3.0 API

So, currently * The connection level socket timeout represents the default value settable upon connection initialization. * The optional method level socket timeout represents the value settable upon method execution which overrides the default one. The old 2.0-style socket and connect timeout

RE: [VOTE] 3.0 alpha 1 release

+0 Thanks Moh -Original Message- From: Michael Becke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 7:32 PM To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: [VOTE] 3.0 alpha 1 release I propose that we mark the latest code in CVS HEAD as 3.0 alpha 1 and proceed with a release.

RE: Streaming requests

Please take a look at: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26070 The code attached to that bug report has been thoroughly tested and does provide you with an OutputStream. Implement OutputStreamWriter and simply write to the provided OutputStream. Do not close the stream. Thanks

RE: [RFE] provide request entities in a more abstract way

From: Ortwin Glück Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 6:27 AM To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: Re: [RFE] provide request entities in a more abstract way In the second case, I would add something like isRepeatable() to handle cases where it is indeed not possible to read the data

RE: [RFE] provide request entities in a more abstract way

To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: Re: [RFE] provide request entities in a more abstract way Rezaei, Mohammad A. wrote: This is a bad idea. The HTTP RFC (2616) explicitly forbids auto retries: Non-idempotent methods or sequences MUST NOT be automatically retried, although user agents MAY

RE: [RFE] provide request entities in a more abstract way

: [RFE] provide request entities in a more abstract way Hello Moh, you are assuming preemptive authentication. In general, authentication is triggered by a 40x response from the server, which means the request has already been sent. best regards, Roland Rezaei, Mohammad A. [EMAIL PROTECTED

RE: streaming request body

Have a look here: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26070 Thanks Moh -Original Message- From: John Keyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 3:49 PM To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: Re: streaming request body Guys, A colleague pointed

RE: JIRA vs Bugzilla issue

Is there an automatic way to move the current issues over to JIRA? The open bugs are important, but the closed ones also contain a wealth of information. Thanks Moh -Original Message- From: Oleg Kalnichevski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 6:41 AM To: Jakarta

RE: [VOTE] 2.0 RC3 Release

+0 Thanks Moh -Original Message- From: Kalnichevski, Oleg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:43 AM To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: RE: [VOTE] 2.0 RC3 Release +1 -Original Message- From: Michael Becke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday,

RE: 2.0rc3 before XMas?

on this? Oleg On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 23:11, Rezaei, Mohammad A. wrote: I would appreciate a resolution to this bug: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25370 I personally think that the patch seems trivial enough that going for 2.0 (instead of 2.1+) is probably warranted

RE: 2.0rc3 before XMas?

I would appreciate a resolution to this bug: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25370 I personally think that the patch seems trivial enough that going for 2.0 (instead of 2.1+) is probably warranted. Oleg: There were no comments from the list, so I assume there was nothing

RE: [Bug 25370] - exception during writeRequest leaves the conn ection un-released

this to the list. Hope it's not a duplicate. -Original Message- From: Oleg Kalnichevski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:54 PM To: Rezaei, Mohammad A. Subject: RE: [Bug 25370] - exception during writeRequest leaves the conn ection un-released Mohammad, I do