It doesn't matter too much to me either way. I've sent an email to the slide-dev group suggesting that they switch to the 2.0 branch, but no action has been taken yet.
Slide is an interesting test case, if only because it is representative of how other clients are using HttpClient, at least that is my guess.
Mind you, I'm not saying that we should hold back HttpClient just for Slide! I agree with you 100% that we should fix critical design flaws. On the other hand, the webdav extensions that Slide has use HttpClient in a way that I think most on this list would consider "standard." To allow the Slide extensions to continue to work in a "drop-in" manner with both the 2.0 and 2.1 branch would be beneficial to all, and not just the Slide project.
Mike raised the version numbering issue a while back. A very simple, clear-cut way for us to look at it is to say that if Slide DAV extensions continue to work with both 2.0 and 2.1, then I think we can get away with calling the changes that are in progress part of a 2.1 release. Otherwise, we should be honest with the clients of HttpClient and call it 3.0.
That's just my perspective.
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
Eric,I don't believe we should just roll back the patch either. It is a design flaw that needs to be fixed. I suggested getResponseLength() as the new alternative that returns a long.
Of course, the patch can be rolled back. Alternatively we can leave getResponseContentLength() method as is, and introduce an additional method that serve similar function but returns long, not int.
But the whole point is that I really can't understand why Slide folks cannot just use stable 2.0 branch. At the end of the day back in February we decided to release 2.0 with the sub-optimal API primarily in order to keep Slide folks happy (even though we were still formally in alpha phase). And now what? Is history about to repeat itself?I don't think that history will repeat itself, because the 2.0 library is a much more stable, reliable, and robust solution that can be built on top of in a contrast to the way that many emails to this list have suggested the 1.0 release was unstable, unreliable, slow, and error prone. Slide has a fallback position now that it didn't have before.
Is there any particular reason for Slide to use CVS HEAD?No.
-Eric.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
