cpp-netlib-devel

[cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2

[Dean M. C. B. <dmb...@fr...>]

Hi Guys,

I've read through the documentation from the docs branch, and I must say
I'm pleased with the content in the quickbook files.

Glyn, should we merge the docs into trunk and package 0.2 for release?

I imagine we should be generating HTML documentation that should go into
the docs/ directory and checked into the subversion repository. Would
you mind doing this as well?

I've elected to postpone the asynchronous body handler implementation
for later. What I have been thinking about is caching the resolved
endpoints instead of having to perform a query everytime a request is
performed, and finally implementing that constructor for the
http::client (to enable/disable features).

It's a little early I know, but comments on what you guys think should
be in 0.3 would be very nice to know. :)

Have a good one!

--
Dean Michael Berris
Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc.

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2

[Glyn M. <gly...@gm...>]

Hi Dean,

2008/9/2 Dean Michael C. Berris <dmb...@fr...>

> Hi Guys,
>
> I've read through the documentation from the docs branch, and I must say
> I'm pleased with the content in the quickbook files.
>
> Glyn, should we merge the docs into trunk and package 0.2 for release?

Yes, though they're still incomplete :)  From now on, assume that you can
always merge the docs.


>
> I imagine we should be generating HTML documentation that should go into
> the docs/ directory and checked into the subversion repository. Would
> you mind doing this as well?
>

Yeah, I can't do it from work so I'll take a look this evening.


>
> I've elected to postpone the asynchronous body handler implementation
> for later. What I have been thinking about is caching the resolved
> endpoints instead of having to perform a query everytime a request is
> performed, and finally implementing that constructor for the
> http::client (to enable/disable features).
>

Sounds good.


>
> It's a little early I know, but comments on what you guys think should
> be in 0.3 would be very nice to know. :)
>

More examples :)


>
> Have a good one!
>

You too,
G

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2

[Glyn M. <gly...@gm...>]

2008/9/2 Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...>

> Hi Dean,
>
> 2008/9/2 Dean Michael C. Berris <dmb...@fr...>
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I've read through the documentation from the docs branch, and I must say
>> I'm pleased with the content in the quickbook files.
>>
>> Glyn, should we merge the docs into trunk and package 0.2 for release?
>
> Yes, though they're still incomplete :)  From now on, assume that you can
> always merge the docs.
>
>
>>
>> I imagine we should be generating HTML documentation that should go into
>> the docs/ directory and checked into the subversion repository. Would
>> you mind doing this as well?
>>
>
> Yeah, I can't do it from work so I'll take a look this evening.
>

OK, merged doc changes into trunk, made docs branch for HTML, then I copied
a new branch from trunk to tag version 0.2.  I'm having a whole load of
problems because sf is really slow and I find the way to publish a release
rather confusing (doesn't help that its quite late).  Dean, can you finish
this up?  Everything you need to do it is in tags/release/0.2.

:(  thanks.
G

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2

[Dean M. C. B. <dmb...@fr...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cpp...@li... 
> [mailto:cpp...@li...] On 
> Behalf Of Glyn Matthews
> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 3:22 AM
> To: C++ Networking Library Developers Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2
> 
> 
> 
> 2008/9/2 Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...>
[snip]
> 
> OK, merged doc changes into trunk, made docs branch for HTML, 
> then I copied a new branch from trunk to tag version 0.2.  
> I'm having a whole load of problems because sf is really slow 
> and I find the way to publish a release rather confusing 
> (doesn't help that its quite late).  Dean, can you finish 
> this up?  Everything you need to do it is in tags/release/0.2.
> 

Thanks, I'll do the packaging today.

Update everyone soon as this is done! :)


--
Dean Michael Berris
Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc. 

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2

[Divye K. <div...@gm...>]

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...>wrote:

>
>
> More examples :)
>

I've written a simple dispatch table kind of function to illustrate string
based dispatch to the http::client. I don't know how to structure this as a
real world example. Should I try merging the dispatch table code with the
http_client example so that it handles different methods (say by having a
command line argument --method GET/POST/PUT etc.) or keep it separate?

Divye


-- 
An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a
cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup.
H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
My official web site: http://people.iitr.ernet.in/shp/061305/
Webmaster: http://www.drkapoorsclinic.com
Blog: http://divyekapoor.blogspot.com

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Packaging 0.2

[Glyn M. <gly...@gm...>]

Hi Divye,

2008/9/2 Divye Kapoor <div...@gm...>

>
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> More examples :)
>>
>
> I've written a simple dispatch table kind of function to illustrate string
> based dispatch to the http::client. I don't know how to structure this as a
> real world example. Should I try merging the dispatch table code with the
> http_client example so that it handles different methods (say by having a
> command line argument --method GET/POST/PUT etc.) or keep it separate?
>

Please keep it separate.  I've added a section to the docs which walks
through the http_client example, so its best to keep this as simple as
possible.

G