Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Branching to Implement HTTP 1.0

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

Hey Glyn!

On 10/8/07, Glyn Matthews <gly...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Dean,
>
> On 08/10/2007, Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...> wrote:
>
> I certainly hope interest hasn't waned yet. I know mine hasn't, and I
> just hope we can get at least 1.0 released before the end of the year.
>
> Interest hasn't waned ;)  I'm glad to see something happening.

Now I'm glad we're getting somewhere. ;)

Let me get it out of the way first, you may now update to revision 23
-- this has been built against the latest Boost trunk. Please let me
know if you encounter problems though, I'm developing on Windows using
MSVC 8.0 Express Edition. I currently do not have access to a Linux
machine, so whoever can run and patch for GCC on that platform would
be very welcome. :)

> > As for the subject, I'm not an SVN expert -- do you guys know how to
> > branch, switch to the branch, continue developing code there (possibly
> > broken stuff), and then later merge back the changes to trunk? And
> > what do you suggest for the branching convention, so that those who
> > are interested in branching off and working on stuff will be able to
> > do so without having to deal with too many issues later?
>
> For such a small group as ourselves, I'm comfortable with the standard SVN
> convention for branches, with (as far as is possible) branches representing
> distinct tasks:
>
> |- cpp-netlib
>   |- trunk
>   |- branches
>     |- http
>     |- dns
>     |- other_clever_stuff
>   |- tags
>
> I think the naming of the branches should represent the tasks rather than
> the identity of the person working on it.  As for integration, maybe this
> responsibility could be given to one individual who people would notify when
> their branch is stable.  They would identify any problems and use the SF
> tracker to update the relevant people of breakages.  I don't think this will
> be a huge amount of work.
>

I completely agree with this. Next time I'm up to something, I'll
branch according to what that something is as well. :)

> > I hope to be able to check in the (crude) HTTP 1.0 client
> > implementation in a while. I'll send another email when I'm done. For
> > the meantime, I'm going to be checking code into the trunk, of course
> > still making sure that the tests aren't broken.
>
> That's OK for now, since there's really only your own branch being worked
> on.
> > Have a great day everyone (evening from here), and I certainly hope to
> > hear from you soon!
>
> Good to hear from you too.  I'll take a look at the code later and I'll give
> you more feedback.

Please do! They're available now from the trunk.

Have a great day everyone, and have fun!

(Note, please help me complete the unit test for HTTP 1.0 -- the
parser is implemented with Boost.Spirit, and if anybody's got time to
make that implementation a bit more sane than it currently is, help is
definitely most wanted. The parsing happens at construction of the
http::request object. I'm also already using Fusion which may up the
compile time if you're going to be using the simple HTTP client.)

Hope to commit more tomorrow. At the moment, I'm going to get some
much needed sleep. :)

Have a great day guys, and have fun with this! :)

-- 
Dean Michael C. Berris
Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc.
[http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com/]
[mik...@gm...]
[+63 928 7291459]
[+1 408 4049523]