serf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1712559 - /serf/trunk/test/test_buckets.c
Date Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:29:04 GMT
On 4 November 2015 at 17:52, Bert Huijben <bert@qqmail.nl> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ivan Zhakov [mailto:ivan@visualsvn.com]
>> Sent: woensdag 4 november 2015 15:50
>> To: Bert Huijben <bert@qqmail.nl>
>> Cc: dev@serf.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1712559 - /serf/trunk/test/test_buckets.c
>>
>> On 4 November 2015 at 17:47, Bert Huijben <bert@qqmail.nl> wrote:
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: rhuijben@apache.org [mailto:rhuijben@apache.org]
>> >> Sent: woensdag 4 november 2015 15:46
>> >> To: dev@serf.apache.org
>> >> Subject: svn commit: r1712559 - /serf/trunk/test/test_buckets.c
>> >>
>> >> Author: rhuijben
>> >> Date: Wed Nov  4 14:45:54 2015
>> >> New Revision: 1712559
>> >>
>> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1712559&view=rev
>> >> Log:
>> >> * test/test_buckets.c
>> >>   (test_buckets): Following up on r1712557, remove accidentally added
>> test
>> >>     reference.
>> >
>> > This was accidentally left from the attached patch that I wrote as one of the
>> options to properly handle 100 and 101 status codes. (Followup on an irc
>> discussion yesterday)
>> >
>> > Patch attached.
>> >
>> I don't see patch attached.
>
> I do see the attachment, but perhaps the list filters it and gmail just shows me whatever
I sent.
>
> The attachment is also on https://lpt1.nl/f/2015/201511-serf-1xx-responses.patch
>
I was thinking about the same approach first (teaching response bucket
handle 1xx responses), but currently I am inclined that interim
responses should be separate response bucket instances handled via
separate callback, if serf API users is going to handle them.


-- 
Ivan Zhakov

Mime
View raw message