desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424201126
Or just not merge it now. I don't know if there's a policy regarding PR
status and longevity, but I could also just move this to a draft PR and
> @desiderantes @gar
arturobernalg commented on code in PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#discussion_r1807479022
##
httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/http/protocol/RequestTE.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+/*
+ * =
ok2c commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424194167
@desiderantes @garydgregory @arturobernalg We can make the new method as
`@Experimental` and even `@Internal` until the standardisation is complete. I
personally do not see a prob
ok2c commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424233009
@desiderantes
```
Failed to execute goal
com.github.siom79.japicmp:japicmp-maven-plugin:0.21.2:cmp (default) on project
httpcore5: There is at least one incompatibility:
o
ok2c commented on PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#issuecomment-2424231917
@arturobernalg Please take a look
https://github.com/ok2c/httpcomponents-core/commit/24a7c00154cf5806125d83886c87967ea2d8bfc4
This is all it takes. The cost is 4 booleans and two
arturobernalg commented on PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#issuecomment-2424195289
@ok2c please take another look.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above t
ok2c commented on code in PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#discussion_r1807479580
##
httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/http/protocol/RequestTE.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+/*
+ * ==
ok2c commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424214497
@desiderantes `japicmp` does not like new fields added to `@Experimenal`.
Just add a comment next to it to keep `japicmp` happy.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache
garydgregory commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424204077
> > Or just not merge it now. I don't know if there's a policy regarding PR
status and longevity, but I could also just move this to a draft PR and
> > > @desiderantes @
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424201670
> @desiderantes @garydgregory @arturobernalg We can mark the new method as
`@Experimental` and even `@Internal` until the standardisation is complete. I
personally do not
ok2c commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424202498
> Or just not merge it now. I don't know if there's a policy regarding PR
status and longevity, but I could also just move this to a draft PR and
>
> > @desiderantes @garydg
ok2c commented on code in PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#discussion_r1807473918
##
httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/http/protocol/RequestTE.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+/*
+ * ==
garydgregory commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424199493
> > An explicit failure mode (not supporting unknown/custom HTTP methods) is
substantially better than mishandled request bodies, so I'd say it is not a
shift, but an enfo
garydgregory commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424200308
> @desiderantes @garydgregory @arturobernalg We can mark the new method as
`@Experimental` and even `@Internal` until the standardisation is complete. I
personally do not
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424193593
> An explicit failure mode (not supporting unknown/custom HTTP methods) is
substantially better than mishandled request bodies, so I'd say it is not a
shift, but an enfor
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424189940
> > I do not understand the argument about inconsistencies of GET with
bodies, this is a different method, services would either support it or not. I
think that's the main
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424184854
> I do not understand the argument about inconsistencies of GET with bodies,
this is a different method, services would either support it or not. I think
that's the main
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424181093
> > > > > I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY
method:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sure
> > > > > ```
> > > > > * Lack of Standardiz
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424168835
> > > I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY method:
> >
> >
> > Sure
> > > ```
> > > * Lack of Standardization: The QUERY method i
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424176249
> > > > I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY
method:
> > >
> > >
> > > Sure
> > > > ```
> > > > * Lack of Standardization: The
garydgregory commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424165151
> > I think it would be good to carry standard Javadoc tags like param,
return, throws, whatever is appropriate for that element. For the description,
I like to be able to
garydgregory commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424163948
> > I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY method:
>
> Sure
>
> > ```
> > * Lack of Standardization: The QUERY method isn't defined
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424162591
> I think it would be good to carry standard Javadoc tags like param,
return, throws, whatever is appropriate for that element. For the description,
I like to be able to u
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424160249
> A draft and not a finalized standard
I think a major web framework adding it pushes forward the need for support
by a lot, since there will be services using it no
garydgregory commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424160216
> > Hi @desiderantes I'd like to see all new public and protected elements
come with Javadoc (with since tags).
>
> Besides a since tag, what else should the builder
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424153453
> > I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY method:
>
> Sure
>
> > ```
> > * Lack of Standardization: The QUERY method isn't define
+1 Release the packages as HttpCore 5.3.1.
Arturo
On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 12:33 PM Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
> Please vote on releasing these packages as HttpCore 5.3.1.
> The vote is open for the at least 72 hours, and only votes from
> HttpComponents PMC members are binding. The vote passes i
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424151161
> Hi @desiderantes I'd like to see all new public and protected elements
come with Javadoc (with since tags).
Besides a since tag, what else should the builder metho
desiderantes commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424150863
> I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY method:
Sure
> * Lack of Standardization: The QUERY method isn't defined in any
official
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424150056
I have a couple of concerns regarding the addition of the QUERY method:
- Lack of Standardization: The QUERY method isn't defined in any official
HTTP specification
arturobernalg commented on PR #499:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499#issuecomment-2424148867
@desiderantes From my understanding, the QUERY method is not defined in any
official HTTP specification
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
T
desiderantes opened a new pull request, #499:
URL: https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/499
This PR introduces support for the HTTP Method `QUERY`, a safe-idempotent
method that has a body. Since Node added [support for the query
method](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/5
ok2c commented on PR #577:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/pull/577#issuecomment-2424101235
> I have also added and @internal annotation to HttpAuthenticator, I cannot
imagine realistic user code calling that directly. (though it does not seem to
apply retroactively)
stoty commented on PR #577:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/pull/577#issuecomment-2423941837
Thank you @ok2c.
I have rebased the patch and temporarily disabled japcmp.
I have also added and @Internal annotation to HttpAuthenticator, I cannot
imagine realistic
ok2c commented on PR #577:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/pull/577#issuecomment-2423930732
@stoty If you want to expedite the review process we could do the following.
Once you are more or less happy with the state of things, submit changes to
`HttpAutheticator` and `
michael-o commented on PR #577:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/pull/577#issuecomment-2423842919
> @stoty @michael-o Folks, what is the reason this PR is stuck? @stoty
Please rebase the latest off master to pick up Docker based compatibility
tests. Feel free to disable
ok2c commented on PR #577:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/pull/577#issuecomment-2423831019
@stoty @michael-o Folks, what is the reason this PR is stuck?
@stoty Please rebase the latest off master to pick up Docker based
compatibility tests. Feel free to disable `ja
+1
I tested the src zip file.
- ASC OK
- SHA512 OK
- 'mvn clean verify' OK
Using:
Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.19045.5011]
-
openjdk version "23" 2024-09-17
OpenJDK Runtime Environment Temurin-23+37 (build 23+37)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM Temurin-23+37 (build 23+37, mixed mode, sharing)
-
Apa
ok2c commented on code in PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#discussion_r1807290941
##
httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/http/protocol/RequestTE.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+/*
+ * ==
ok2c commented on code in PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#discussion_r1807286840
##
httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/http/protocol/RequestTE.java:
##
@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+/*
+ * ==
ok2c commented on PR #498:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/pull/498#issuecomment-2423756515
> @ok2c I’ve made the changes as you suggested. I’ve removed the new TE
checks for HTTP/2 since they were redundant with the existing validations in
H2RequestConformance. Apologie
Please vote on releasing these packages as HttpCore 5.3.1.
The vote is open for the at least 72 hours, and only votes from
HttpComponents PMC members are binding. The vote passes if at least
three binding +1 votes are cast and there are more +1 than -1 votes.
Release notes:
https://dist.apache.o
42 matches
Mail list logo
