www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Curl wrapper

reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
Hi,

I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.

If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?

Regards,
Jonas
Aug 10 2011
next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Wednesday, August 10, 2011 09:16:35 Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,
 
 I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.
 
 If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
 So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?


LOL. No, I'm not the one who schedules reviews. We don't really have anyone 
who does that. We don't even have altogether formal queue. People post when 
they have something for review, and we roughly keep track of what's supposed 
to be next in the queue based on what gets posted when and what's actually 
ready for review after whatever is currently up for review is done being 
reviewed. Someone then volunteers to be the review manager for whatever is 
being reviewed, and they handle posting about the review and counting the 
votes and whatnot. I _did_ volunteer to be the review manager for the curl 
wrapper when you last brought it up for review, though you never responded 
about that and std.path ended up getting reviewed first, since Lars was back 
from vacation.

Now, there are a few items which are in the review queue at the moment. We 
should probably have a page somewhere which keeps track of the review queue 
more formally, but we don't at the moment. The whole thing is fairly informal. 
However, if I recall correctly, the items which are supposedly ready for 
review are the new std.log and the curl wrapper. Also, Jesse Phillips has a 
module for parsing CSV files which may or may not be ready for review (his post 
on it made it clear that he was looking to have it reviewed soon, but it 
wasn't entirely clear whether it was actually ready for a formal review). 
There are some other items which I believe are at least close to being ready 
for review (e.g. Robert Jacques has done some work on revising std.json), but 
I'm not aware of anything else which is actually ready for review.

So, that leaves std.log and the curl wrapper. I believe that std.log has been 
the queue longer, so if Jose is actually ready for it to be reviewed now (he 
was on vacation, which is why it hasn't been reviewed yet), then that should 
be reviewed before the curl wrapper, but if he's not ready, and you're ready 
for the curl wrapper to be reviewed, then the curl wrapper should be reviewed 
next.

- Jonathan M Davis
Aug 10 2011
parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 10/08/11 09.49, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Wednesday, August 10, 2011 09:16:35 Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.

 If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
 So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?


 LOL. No, I'm not the one who schedules reviews. We don't really have anyone
 who does that. We don't even have altogether formal queue. People post when
 they have something for review, and we roughly keep track of what's supposed
 to be next in the queue based on what gets posted when and what's actually
 ready for review after whatever is currently up for review is done being
 reviewed. Someone then volunteers to be the review manager for whatever is
 being reviewed, and they handle posting about the review and counting the
 votes and whatnot. I _did_ volunteer to be the review manager for the curl
 wrapper when you last brought it up for review, though you never responded
 about that and std.path ended up getting reviewed first, since Lars was back
 from vacation.


Yeah sorry about not getting back earlier. Been on vacation and other 
stuff - no excuse though.

I'll wait for Jose to reply whether he is ready with the std.log and if 
he is not I guess I can post the curl wrapper review info.

Btw. didn't Andrei implement a std.log module as well recently?



 Now, there are a few items which are in the review queue at the moment. We
 should probably have a page somewhere which keeps track of the review queue
 more formally, but we don't at the moment. The whole thing is fairly informal.
 However, if I recall correctly, the items which are supposedly ready for
 review are the new std.log and the curl wrapper. Also, Jesse Phillips has a
 module for parsing CSV files which may or may not be ready for review (his post
 on it made it clear that he was looking to have it reviewed soon, but it
 wasn't entirely clear whether it was actually ready for a formal review).
 There are some other items which I believe are at least close to being ready
 for review (e.g. Robert Jacques has done some work on revising std.json), but
 I'm not aware of anything else which is actually ready for review.

 So, that leaves std.log and the curl wrapper. I believe that std.log has been
 the queue longer, so if Jose is actually ready for it to be reviewed now (he
 was on vacation, which is why it hasn't been reviewed yet), then that should
 be reviewed before the curl wrapper, but if he's not ready, and you're ready
 for the curl wrapper to be reviewed, then the curl wrapper should be reviewed
 next.

 - Jonathan M Davis
Aug 10 2011
parent "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
 On 10/08/11 09.49, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 On Wednesday, August 10, 2011 09:16:35 Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,
 
 I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.
 
 If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
 So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?


 
 LOL. No, I'm not the one who schedules reviews. We don't really have
 anyone who does that. We don't even have altogether formal queue. People
 post when they have something for review, and we roughly keep track of
 what's supposed to be next in the queue based on what gets posted when
 and what's actually ready for review after whatever is currently up for
 review is done being reviewed. Someone then volunteers to be the review
 manager for whatever is being reviewed, and they handle posting about
 the review and counting the votes and whatnot. I _did_ volunteer to be
 the review manager for the curl wrapper when you last brought it up for
 review, though you never responded about that and std.path ended up
 getting reviewed first, since Lars was back from vacation.


 
 Yeah sorry about not getting back earlier. Been on vacation and other
 stuff - no excuse though.
 
 I'll wait for Jose to reply whether he is ready with the std.log and if
 he is not I guess I can post the curl wrapper review info.
 
 Btw. didn't Andrei implement a std.log module as well recently?


He was, and then other people started doing it at the same time, and 
ultimately, Jose ended up doing one which is supposed to be at least somewhat 
based on what Andrei was doing IIRC, but I haven't really paid much attention 
to the details, so I don't know quite what the API or implementation looks 
like at this point.

- Jonathan M Davis
Aug 10 2011
prev sibling parent reply Johannes Pfau <spam example.com> writes:
Jonas Drewsen wrote:

Hi,

I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.

If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?

Regards,
Jonas


Sorry, I wanted to post this earlier but then I totally forgot about
it, so here's a last minute request: Could you add proxy support to the
wrapper? All of CURLOPT_PROXY CURLOPT_PROXYPORT and CURLOPT_PROXYTYPE
should be available. (The 'combined' CURLOPT_PROXY since 7.21.7 is too
new, that's not even in the current ubuntu)

Also, although it'd break encapsulation, I think the curl handle should
be accessible from the Http and Curl structs. But that's debatable, so
I'll brink it up in the review thread where it should be discussed
first.

-- 
Johannes Pfau
Aug 10 2011
parent reply Jonas Drewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:
On 10/08/11 11.14, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.

 If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
 So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?

 Regards,
 Jonas


 Sorry, I wanted to post this earlier but then I totally forgot about
 it, so here's a last minute request: Could you add proxy support to the
 wrapper? All of CURLOPT_PROXY CURLOPT_PROXYPORT and CURLOPT_PROXYTYPE
 should be available. (The 'combined' CURLOPT_PROXY since 7.21.7 is too
 new, that's not even in the current ubuntu)

 Also, although it'd break encapsulation, I think the curl handle should
 be accessible from the Http and Curl structs. But that's debatable, so
 I'll brink it up in the review thread where it should be discussed
 first.


I'll put it on the list of review comments if that is ok. I would very 
much like to gather as much review input as possible before running over 
the code once more.

/Jonas
Aug 10 2011
parent Johannes Pfau <spam example.com> writes:
Jonas Drewsen wrote:

On 10/08/11 11.14, Johannes Pfau wrote:

 Jonas Drewsen wrote:

 Hi,

 I believe the curl wrapper is ready for a first round of reviews.

 If I remember correctly it is Jonathan who schedules the reviews.
 So Jonathan: Do you know when this could fit in?

 Regards,
 Jonas


 Sorry, I wanted to post this earlier but then I totally forgot about
 it, so here's a last minute request: Could you add proxy support to
 the wrapper? All of CURLOPT_PROXY CURLOPT_PROXYPORT and
 CURLOPT_PROXYTYPE should be available. (The 'combined' CURLOPT_PROXY
 since 7.21.7 is too new, that's not even in the current ubuntu)

 Also, although it'd break encapsulation, I think the curl handle
 should be accessible from the Http and Curl structs. But that's
 debatable, so I'll brink it up in the review thread where it should
 be discussed first.


I'll put it on the list of review comments if that is ok. I would very 
much like to gather as much review input as possible before running
over the code once more.

/Jonas


Sure, I'm fine with that.
-- 
Johannes Pfau
Aug 10 2011