cpp-netlib-devel

[cpp-netlib-devel] Integrated URI into http::request

[Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...>]

Hi Guys,

I've just committed revision 203 which integrates the URI
implementation into http::request. Now the classic spirit parser in
http::request has been removed and delegated to the URI object
internal to every http::request.

All tests pass and the changes were minimal.

Thanks and I hope this helps.

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
blog.cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/mikhailberis
linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Integrated URI into http::request

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

Hi Dean,

2009/11/29 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>

> Hi Guys,
>
> I've just committed revision 203 which integrates the URI
> implementation into http::request. Now the classic spirit parser in
> http::request has been removed and delegated to the URI object
> internal to every http::request.
>
> All tests pass and the changes were minimal.
>

That's great! This a box checked and means we should be close to a release.
Thanks,
Glyn

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Integrated URI into http::request

[Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...>]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Dean,
>
> 2009/11/29 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I've just committed revision 203 which integrates the URI
>> implementation into http::request. Now the classic spirit parser in
>> http::request has been removed and delegated to the URI object
>> internal to every http::request.
>>
>> All tests pass and the changes were minimal.
>
> That's great! This a box checked and means we should be close to a release.

Do you remember the other checklist items?

The only thing I remember are: uri implementation and https (?). Am I
missing anything else?

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
blog.cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/mikhailberis
linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Integrated URI into http::request

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

2009/11/29 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...>
> wrote:
> > Hi Dean,
> >
> > 2009/11/29 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>
> >>
> >> Hi Guys,
> >>
> >> I've just committed revision 203 which integrates the URI
> >> implementation into http::request. Now the classic spirit parser in
> >> http::request has been removed and delegated to the URI object
> >> internal to every http::request.
> >>
> >> All tests pass and the changes were minimal.
> >
> > That's great! This a box checked and means we should be close to a
> release.
>
> Do you remember the other checklist items?
>
>
There are 8 open tickets, otherwise:

1. URI
2. HTTP URI in client
3. Better docs
4. Better examples

We're doing quite poorly for docs and examples.



> The only thing I remember are: uri implementation and https (?). Am I
> missing anything else?
>
>
How close are you to HTTPS?  If it can't be done soon then I suggest we get
a release before returning to this later.
G

Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Integrated URI into http::request

[Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...>]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
>
> 2009/11/29 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>
>>
>> Do you remember the other checklist items?
>>
>
> There are 8 open tickets, otherwise:
>
> 1. URI

I think I need to merge in your changes from the integration_0_4
branch into my branch -- apparently you've fixed the string specific
stuff and I haven't picked those up yet. :D

> 2. HTTP URI in client

The merge would have to wait then for the merge I need to do from above.

> 3. Better docs
> 4. Better examples
>
> We're doing quite poorly for docs and examples.
>

Yeah, let me see what I can do about those.

>
>>
>> The only thing I remember are: uri implementation and https (?). Am I
>> missing anything else?
>>
>
> How close are you to HTTPS?  If it can't be done soon then I suggest we get
> a release before returning to this later.

Nowhere near. Yup, we should move HTTPS to 0.5. I want to stabilize
the URI implementation first.

Thanks for the response! :)

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
blog.cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/mikhailberis
linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com