[squeak-dev] Re: HTTP client library in Pharo?

Andreas Raab andreas.raab at gmx.de
Tue Aug 10 05:23:49 UTC 2010


On 8/9/2010 9:18 PM, Andrei Stebakov wrote:
> What's the process of code review for Sqeak/Pharo?
> I just tried to post my changes for WebClient Monticello repository
> via "Save" and it got rejected with error "401". Looks like I don't
> have write access to it.

That's right. I'm the sole author of WebClient for the time being. If 
you have patches or improvements that you'd like to contribute, please 
send them to me.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Andrei Stebakov<lispercat-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>> Yes, that's correct for Set-cookie (the response), each has its own line.
>> "Cookies: " for request should be all in one line.
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Philippe Marschall<kustos-hi6Y0CQ0nG0 at public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>>> On 04.08.2010 19:15, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>>> On 8/4/2010 9:57 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
>>>>> Hi Adrei, excellent :)
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, for HTTP Client you should cc Andreas Raab   or squeak mailing
>>>>> list....
>>>>
>>>> Squeak-dev please
>>>> (http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/squeak-dev).
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Andrei Stebakov<lispercat-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org
>>>>> <mailto:lispercat-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>      I also found that cookies were not correctly sent.
>>>>>      Every cookie was sent with its own "Cookie: " header which is not
>>>>>      correct.
>>>>
>>>> I'm curious, why do you think that's incorrect? My understanding is that
>>>> RFC 2616 explicitly allows that:
>>>>
>>>>      "Multiple message-header fields with the same field-name MAY be
>>>> present in a message if and only if the entire field-value for that
>>>> header field is defined as a comma-separated list [i.e., #(values)]. It
>>>> MUST be possible to combine the multiple header fields into one
>>>> 'field-name: field-value' pair, without changing the semantics of the
>>>> message, by appending each subsequent field-value to the first, each
>>>> separated by a comma."
>>>
>>> You're correct, but that doesn't mean the implementations follow the
>>> spec :-(. I can only speak for Set-Cookie, there you have to send each
>>> cookie on a new line because the expires date format includes a comma
>>> and Firefox and IE can't handle that.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Philippe
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> Pharo-project-bM+ny+RY8h+a+bCvCPl5/gCzwTLBPCX0 at public.gmane.org
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list