You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hc.apache.org by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> on 2020/01/01 13:45:26 UTC
HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Folks
Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
Do we still need to rename anything in core?
Oleg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Ryan Schmitt <rs...@apache.org>.
I eagerly await the release of beta11. I'll follow up with my commit to
upgrade the client:
https://github.com/rschmitt/httpcomponents-client/commit/390d9f3aae00e98c50d41aa20c6c2075e7a13915
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 5:45 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> Folks
>
> Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
>
> Do we still need to rename anything in core?
>
> Oleg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>
>
Re: HttpAsyncClient exception callback; Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Ryan Schmitt <rs...@apache.org>.
I can't help but observe that this is a workaround for the lack of logging
in core; the client is basically dependency-injecting Slf4j into core. The
`LoggingIOSessionDecorator` on the previous line would appear to be doing
the same thing.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 2:45 PM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 12:03 -0800, Ryan Schmitt wrote:
> > I suppose this is as good a time as any to ask: why do single-core
> > IOReactors support the Exception callback (for error logging), but
> > not
> > multi-core IOReactors?
>
> MultiCoreIOReactor is nothing more than a collection of
> SingleCoreIOReactor instances. They all share the same exception
> callback
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/blob/master/httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/reactor/DefaultListeningIOReactor.java#L89
>
>
> > Also, how should this callback be configured when
> > creating a client? (I wasn't able to immediately find the relevant
> > config
> > method to call.)
> >
>
> At the moment HttpAsyncClientBuilder always uses the same
> LoggingExceptionCallback instance that simply logs exceptions with
> ERROR priority
>
>
> https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/blob/master/httpclient5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/client5/http/impl/async/HttpAsyncClientBuilder.java#L929
>
> https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/blob/master/httpclient5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/client5/http/impl/async/LoggingExceptionCallback.java
>
> If you like this can be made more customisable.
>
> Does that clarify things a bit?
>
> Oleg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>
>
HttpAsyncClient exception callback; Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 12:03 -0800, Ryan Schmitt wrote:
> I suppose this is as good a time as any to ask: why do single-core
> IOReactors support the Exception callback (for error logging), but
> not
> multi-core IOReactors?
MultiCoreIOReactor is nothing more than a collection of
SingleCoreIOReactor instances. They all share the same exception
callback
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-core/blob/master/httpcore5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/core5/reactor/DefaultListeningIOReactor.java#L89
> Also, how should this callback be configured when
> creating a client? (I wasn't able to immediately find the relevant
> config
> method to call.)
>
At the moment HttpAsyncClientBuilder always uses the same
LoggingExceptionCallback instance that simply logs exceptions with
ERROR priority
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/blob/master/httpclient5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/client5/http/impl/async/HttpAsyncClientBuilder.java#L929
https://github.com/apache/httpcomponents-client/blob/master/httpclient5/src/main/java/org/apache/hc/client5/http/impl/async/LoggingExceptionCallback.java
If you like this can be made more customisable.
Does that clarify things a bit?
Oleg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Ryan Schmitt <rs...@apache.org>.
I suppose this is as good a time as any to ask: why do single-core
IOReactors support the Exception callback (for error logging), but not
multi-core IOReactors? Also, how should this callback be configured when
creating a client? (I wasn't able to immediately find the relevant config
method to call.)
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 11:46 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 11:25 -0800, Ryan Schmitt wrote:
> > This is still a beta release, right? My understanding is that we're
> > going
> > to treat it as a release candidate and try to avoid breaking changes,
> > but
> > we can still make them if necessary (e.g. to fix some show-stopping
> > defect).
> >
>
> That goes without saying. But changes driven largely by a subjective
> sense of aesthetics ought to come with a migration path.
>
> Oleg
>
>
> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 11:08 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 14:00 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > > I think b11 can go ahead.
> > > >
> > > > Gary
> > >
> > >
> > > Folks
> > >
> > > That effectively means no more renaming and moving things around
> > > without deprecation and a migration path.
> > >
> > > I will proceed with the release later today or tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Oleg
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 12:33 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 09:54 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <
> > > > >
> > > > > garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <
> > > > >
> > > > > garydgregory@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <
> > > > > > > > michaelo@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > > > > > > > > Folks
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or
> > > > > > > > > > not?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary,
> > > > > > > > > Ryan?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums.
> > > > >
> > > > > Specifically,
> > > > > > > > we did not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and
> > > > > > > > AuthScheme
> > > > > > > > types.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I will experiment now with something like renaming
> > > > >
> > > > > AuthSchemes to
> > > > > > > > StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface
> > > > > > > > lie AuthScheme.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work
> > > > >
> > > > > since
> > > > > > > AuthScheme implementations carry state.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to
> > > > > > > StandardAuthScheme.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > WDYT? I'll make a PR.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is for the client, not core, doh.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary,
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there _anything_ that blocks the release of _core_ in your
> > > > > opinion?
> > > > > While core is being released there will still be time to work
> > > > > on
> > > > > client.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oleg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ----
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
> > >
> > >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>
>
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 11:25 -0800, Ryan Schmitt wrote:
> This is still a beta release, right? My understanding is that we're
> going
> to treat it as a release candidate and try to avoid breaking changes,
> but
> we can still make them if necessary (e.g. to fix some show-stopping
> defect).
>
That goes without saying. But changes driven largely by a subjective
sense of aesthetics ought to come with a migration path.
Oleg
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 11:08 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 14:00 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > I think b11 can go ahead.
> > >
> > > Gary
> >
> >
> > Folks
> >
> > That effectively means no more renaming and moving things around
> > without deprecation and a migration path.
> >
> > I will proceed with the release later today or tomorrow.
> >
> > Oleg
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 12:33 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 09:54 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <
> > > >
> > > > garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <
> > > >
> > > > garydgregory@gmail.com
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <
> > > > > > > michaelo@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > > > > > > > Folks
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or
> > > > > > > > > not?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead.
> > > >
> > > > Gary,
> > > > > > > > Ryan?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums.
> > > >
> > > > Specifically,
> > > > > > > we did not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and
> > > > > > > AuthScheme
> > > > > > > types.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I will experiment now with something like renaming
> > > >
> > > > AuthSchemes to
> > > > > > > StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface
> > > > > > > lie AuthScheme.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work
> > > >
> > > > since
> > > > > > AuthScheme implementations carry state.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to
> > > > > > StandardAuthScheme.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WDYT? I'll make a PR.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This is for the client, not core, doh.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Gary,
> > > >
> > > > Is there _anything_ that blocks the release of _core_ in your
> > > > opinion?
> > > > While core is being released there will still be time to work
> > > > on
> > > > client.
> > > >
> > > > Oleg
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Ryan Schmitt <rs...@apache.org>.
This is still a beta release, right? My understanding is that we're going
to treat it as a release candidate and try to avoid breaking changes, but
we can still make them if necessary (e.g. to fix some show-stopping defect).
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 11:08 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 14:00 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > I think b11 can go ahead.
> >
> > Gary
>
>
> Folks
>
> That effectively means no more renaming and moving things around
> without deprecation and a migration path.
>
> I will proceed with the release later today or tomorrow.
>
> Oleg
>
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 12:33 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 09:54 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <
> > > garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <
> > > garydgregory@gmail.com
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <
> > > > > > michaelo@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > > > > > > Folks
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead.
> > > Gary,
> > > > > > > Ryan?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums.
> > > Specifically,
> > > > > > we did not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme
> > > > > > types.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will experiment now with something like renaming
> > > AuthSchemes to
> > > > > > StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface
> > > > > > lie AuthScheme.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work
> > > since
> > > > > AuthScheme implementations carry state.
> > > > >
> > > > > At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to
> > > > > StandardAuthScheme.
> > > > >
> > > > > WDYT? I'll make a PR.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is for the client, not core, doh.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Gary,
> > >
> > > Is there _anything_ that blocks the release of _core_ in your
> > > opinion?
> > > While core is being released there will still be time to work on
> > > client.
> > >
> > > Oleg
> > >
> > >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>
>
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 14:00 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> I think b11 can go ahead.
>
> Gary
Folks
That effectively means no more renaming and moving things around
without deprecation and a migration path.
I will proceed with the release later today or tomorrow.
Oleg
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 12:33 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 09:54 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <
> > garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <
> > garydgregory@gmail.com
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <
> > > > > michaelo@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > > > > > Folks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead.
> > Gary,
> > > > > > Ryan?
> > > > >
> > > > > We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums.
> > Specifically,
> > > > > we did not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme
> > > > > types.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will experiment now with something like renaming
> > AuthSchemes to
> > > > > StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface
> > > > > lie AuthScheme.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work
> > since
> > > > AuthScheme implementations carry state.
> > > >
> > > > At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to
> > > > StandardAuthScheme.
> > > >
> > > > WDYT? I'll make a PR.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This is for the client, not core, doh.
> > >
> >
> > Gary,
> >
> > Is there _anything_ that blocks the release of _core_ in your
> > opinion?
> > While core is being released there will still be time to work on
> > client.
> >
> > Oleg
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
I think b11 can go ahead.
Gary
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 12:33 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 09:54 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <
> > > > michaelo@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > > > > Folks
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
> > > > >
> > > > > Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead. Gary,
> > > > > Ryan?
> > > >
> > > > We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums. Specifically,
> > > > we did not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme
> > > > types.
> > > >
> > > > I will experiment now with something like renaming AuthSchemes to
> > > > StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface
> > > > lie AuthScheme.
> > > >
> > >
> > > A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work since
> > > AuthScheme implementations carry state.
> > >
> > > At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to
> > > StandardAuthScheme.
> > >
> > > WDYT? I'll make a PR.
> > >
> >
> > This is for the client, not core, doh.
> >
>
> Gary,
>
> Is there _anything_ that blocks the release of _core_ in your opinion?
> While core is being released there will still be time to work on
> client.
>
> Oleg
>
>
>
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 09:54 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <
> > > michaelo@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > > > Folks
> > > > >
> > > > > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
> > > > >
> > > > > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
> > > >
> > > > Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead. Gary,
> > > > Ryan?
> > >
> > > We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums. Specifically,
> > > we did not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme
> > > types.
> > >
> > > I will experiment now with something like renaming AuthSchemes to
> > > StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface
> > > lie AuthScheme.
> > >
> >
> > A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work since
> > AuthScheme implementations carry state.
> >
> > At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to
> > StandardAuthScheme.
> >
> > WDYT? I'll make a PR.
> >
>
> This is for the client, not core, doh.
>
Gary,
Is there _anything_ that blocks the release of _core_ in your opinion?
While core is being released there will still be time to work on
client.
Oleg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:43 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
>>> > Folks
>>> >
>>> > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
>>> >
>>> > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
>>>
>>> Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead. Gary, Ryan?
>>>
>>
>> We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums. Specifically, we did
>> not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme types.
>>
>> I will experiment now with something like renaming AuthSchemes to
>> StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface lie AuthScheme.
>>
>
> A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work since
> AuthScheme implementations carry state.
>
> At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to StandardAuthScheme.
>
> WDYT? I'll make a PR.
>
This is for the client, not core, doh.
Gary
>
> Gary
>
>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>> M
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>>>
>>>
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 9:23 AM Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
>> > Folks
>> >
>> > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
>> >
>> > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
>>
>> Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead. Gary, Ryan?
>>
>
> We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums. Specifically, we did
> not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme types.
>
> I will experiment now with something like renaming AuthSchemes to
> StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface lie AuthScheme.
>
A very quick look suggests that such a design will not work since
AuthScheme implementations carry state.
At the very least we should rename AuthSchemes to StandardAuthScheme.
WDYT? I'll make a PR.
Gary
> Gary
>
>
>> M
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>>
>>
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > Folks
> >
> > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
> >
> > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
>
> Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead. Gary, Ryan?
>
We did a good but partial job of cleaning up enums. Specifically, we did
not circle back to our dual AuthSchemes and AuthScheme types.
I will experiment now with something like renaming AuthSchemes to
StandardAuthScheme and having it implement an interface lie AuthScheme.
Gary
> M
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>
>
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>.
Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> Folks
>
> Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
>
> Do we still need to rename anything in core?
Nothing left on my list. From my POV, you may go ahead. Gary, Ryan?
M
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>.
Am 2020-01-02 um 19:47 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 23:46 +0100, Michael Osipov wrote:
>> Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
>>> Folks
>>>
>>> Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
>>>
>>> Do we still need to rename anything in core?
>>
>> One nit during testing which should be addressed before GA:
>>
>> When running: JSSEProviderIntegrationTest and Conscrypt JAR does not
>> contain a JNI wrapper for the platform the tests are run:
>>> unzip -t ./org/conscrypt/conscrypt-openjdk-uber/2.2.1/conscrypt-
>>> openjdk-uber-2.2.1.jar | grep native
>>> testing: META-INF/native/ OK
>>> testing: META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-linux-
>>> x86_64.so OK
>>> testing: META-INF/native/conscrypt_openjdk_jni-windows-
>>> x86.dll OK
>>> testing: META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-osx-
>>> x86_64.dylib OK
>>> testing: META-INF/native/conscrypt_openjdk_jni-windows-
>>> x86_64.dll OK
>>
>> tests fail with:
>>
>> > JSSEProviderIntegrationTest.*[Conscrypt TLS v1.2] »
>> UnsatisfiedLink
>> > JSSEProviderIntegrationTest.*[Conscrypt TLS v1.3] »
>> UnsatisfiedLink
>>
>> in detail (example):
>>
>>> [ERROR] testSimpleGet[Conscrypt
>>> TLSv1.2](org.apache.hc.core5.testing.nio.JSSEPro
>>> viderIntegrationTest) Time elapsed: 0.34 s <<<
>>> ERROR!
>>> java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no conscrypt_openjdk_jni-freebsd-
>>> x86 in java.lib rary.path
>>
>> That's bad portability. I would expect an Assume which verifies that
>> the
>> security provide has been successfully loaded.
>>
>
> Any recommendation how that could be accomplished?
No, not yet. I will file an issue first to track this and not to be
forgotten. There is a workaround to disable this test for now.
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2020-01-01 at 23:46 +0100, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > Folks
> >
> > Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
> >
> > Do we still need to rename anything in core?
>
> One nit during testing which should be addressed before GA:
>
> When running: JSSEProviderIntegrationTest and Conscrypt JAR does not
> contain a JNI wrapper for the platform the tests are run:
> > unzip -t ./org/conscrypt/conscrypt-openjdk-uber/2.2.1/conscrypt-
> > openjdk-uber-2.2.1.jar | grep native
> > testing: META-INF/native/ OK
> > testing: META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-linux-
> > x86_64.so OK
> > testing: META-INF/native/conscrypt_openjdk_jni-windows-
> > x86.dll OK
> > testing: META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-osx-
> > x86_64.dylib OK
> > testing: META-INF/native/conscrypt_openjdk_jni-windows-
> > x86_64.dll OK
>
> tests fail with:
>
> > JSSEProviderIntegrationTest.*[Conscrypt TLS v1.2] »
> UnsatisfiedLink
> > JSSEProviderIntegrationTest.*[Conscrypt TLS v1.3] »
> UnsatisfiedLink
>
> in detail (example):
>
> > [ERROR] testSimpleGet[Conscrypt
> > TLSv1.2](org.apache.hc.core5.testing.nio.JSSEPro
> > viderIntegrationTest) Time elapsed: 0.34 s <<<
> > ERROR!
> > java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no conscrypt_openjdk_jni-freebsd-
> > x86 in java.lib rary.path
>
> That's bad portability. I would expect an Assume which verifies that
> the
> security provide has been successfully loaded.
>
Any recommendation how that could be accomplished?
Oleg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
Re: HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release?
Posted by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>.
Am 2020-01-01 um 14:45 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> Folks
>
> Shall I proceed with HttpCore 5.0-beta11 release or not?
>
> Do we still need to rename anything in core?
One nit during testing which should be addressed before GA:
When running: JSSEProviderIntegrationTest and Conscrypt JAR does not
contain a JNI wrapper for the platform the tests are run:
> unzip -t ./org/conscrypt/conscrypt-openjdk-uber/2.2.1/conscrypt-openjdk-uber-2.2.1.jar | grep native
> testing: META-INF/native/ OK
> testing: META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-linux-x86_64.so OK
> testing: META-INF/native/conscrypt_openjdk_jni-windows-x86.dll OK
> testing: META-INF/native/libconscrypt_openjdk_jni-osx-x86_64.dylib OK
> testing: META-INF/native/conscrypt_openjdk_jni-windows-x86_64.dll OK
tests fail with:
> JSSEProviderIntegrationTest.*[Conscrypt TLS v1.2] » UnsatisfiedLink
> JSSEProviderIntegrationTest.*[Conscrypt TLS v1.3] » UnsatisfiedLink
in detail (example):
> [ERROR] testSimpleGet[Conscrypt TLSv1.2](org.apache.hc.core5.testing.nio.JSSEPro viderIntegrationTest) Time elapsed: 0.34 s <<< ERROR!
> java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no conscrypt_openjdk_jni-freebsd-x86 in java.lib rary.path
That's bad portability. I would expect an Assume which verifies that the
security provide has been successfully loaded.
Regards,
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org