makeRequest to headers or not to headers, that is the question

[Chris Chabot <ch...@google.com>]

Hey All,

While debugging the UTF8 makeRequest FEED parsing, I noticed that java
shindig doesn't include the headers in it's /makeRequest response, while the
spec does state that headers should be populated.

Is that intentional ? I could imagine why,  since for 99% of the cases it's
just wasting bandwidth with useless information however in the past we have
had a 1% of people who wanted to use headers to communicate xml-rpc session
id's and sorts.

For the time being I'll mimic the no-headers behavior, but wanted to double
check that that is indeed the correct thing to do.

    -- Chris

Re: makeRequest to headers or not to headers, that is the question

[Chris Chabot <ch...@google.com>]

Thanks!

Sounds reasonable. Don't suppose you'd know from the top of your head where
the whitelist / filter is defined so I can duplicate that?

   -- Chris

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure that it's "no" headers -- I think it's just a strict
> whitelist,
> and yeah, I'm pretty sure it was done this way to save bandwidth since most
> web headers are a waste.
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Chris Chabot <ch...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey All,
> >
> > While debugging the UTF8 makeRequest FEED parsing, I noticed that java
> > shindig doesn't include the headers in it's /makeRequest response, while
> > the
> > spec does state that headers should be populated.
> >
> > Is that intentional ? I could imagine why,  since for 99% of the cases
> it's
> > just wasting bandwidth with useless information however in the past we
> have
> > had a 1% of people who wanted to use headers to communicate xml-rpc
> session
> > id's and sorts.
> >
> > For the time being I'll mimic the no-headers behavior, but wanted to
> double
> > check that that is indeed the correct thing to do.
> >
> >    -- Chris
> >
>

Re: makeRequest to headers or not to headers, that is the question

[Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>]

I'm not sure that it's "no" headers -- I think it's just a strict whitelist,
and yeah, I'm pretty sure it was done this way to save bandwidth since most
web headers are a waste.

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Chris Chabot <ch...@google.com> wrote:

> Hey All,
>
> While debugging the UTF8 makeRequest FEED parsing, I noticed that java
> shindig doesn't include the headers in it's /makeRequest response, while
> the
> spec does state that headers should be populated.
>
> Is that intentional ? I could imagine why,  since for 99% of the cases it's
> just wasting bandwidth with useless information however in the past we have
> had a 1% of people who wanted to use headers to communicate xml-rpc session
> id's and sorts.
>
> For the time being I'll mimic the no-headers behavior, but wanted to double
> check that that is indeed the correct thing to do.
>
>    -- Chris
>