From: Dean M. B. <mik...@gm...> - 2010-01-21 17:40:19
|
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Jeroen Habraken <vex...@gm...> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 18:17, Dean Michael Berris > <mik...@gm...> wrote: >> >> Are these patches also on your fork? Those would be good to have >> merged into the 0.5-devel line soon. > > No, they aren't, and I was about to ask. It might be easiest here if I > create a couple of issues and attach the patches there. > Definitely. >> BTW, are your changes ready to merge into 0.5-devel so I can test locally? > > Not really, there is still quite a bit of work to be done as I've > described in the URI thread, and major functionality like the IP > parsing is missing. As I have exams at the moment it's hard to tell > when I have time to work on this. The current code in my fork should > compile and run though, and I'd like your opinion on the way I > implemented the derived HTTP class in my fork. > Alright, sure let me take a look and let you know soon enough. :) > Also, my code breaks some of the current code, it seems mostly from > the transition from protocol() to scheme(), so those need to be fixed. > Cool, no worries there. Let me know when you've done these changes on your branch too and once the tests pass we should be good to go for a merge. > > Sorry, attached the wrong patch, this one will actually fix the > documentation and tests. > No problem, thanks for these! -- Dean Michael Berris cplusplus-soup.com | twitter.com/deanberris linkedin.com/in/mikhailberis | facebook.com/dean.berris | deanberris.com |