Actually Slide ships with a copy of Httpclient that manually has been updated from time to time. The confusion arises just because Httpclient is listed as a dependency of Slide in its Gump project definition. This causes the nightly builds to fail.
I had my first look at Gump today and it seems to me that, unfortunately, you cannot tell it to build against a specific CVS branch. So I am considering to remove the dependency from Slide's project definition. It's just a pity that this narrows the purpose of Gump. Regards, Ingo > Eric, > > 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? > > Is there any particular reason for Slide to use CVS HEAD? =20 > > Oleg > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 14:16 > To: Commons HttpClient Project > Subject: Re: FW: Commons-HttpClient conflict with WebDAVClient > > > Oleg, > > Actually, I'm expecting that the redirect fix will probably not change=20 > the way that webdavclient.jar works with HttpClient. I think the=20 > redirect fix will only be a problem for some uses of the HttpClient = > library. > > I would appreciate the change of the getResponseContentLength() back to=20 > its previous return value. I think it would be worth revisiting that=20 > decision. > > How about getResponseContentLength() and getResponseLength()? > > -Eric. > > Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote: > > >>There's also the int/long change for getResponseContentLength() which=20 > >>causes the compile to break on one or the other. Perhaps we should=20 > >>rethink the decision to just change that return type? > >> =20 > >> > > > >And are we going to do when the redirect fix is implemented? People = > should not expect Slide to compile against CVS HEAD until 2.1 (or 3.0) = > APIs are frozen.=20 > > > >Evil Comrade Oleg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
