> -----Original Message----- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: woensdag 5 november 2003 15:25 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Vote] empty HTTP responses [was Re: Cannot > easily set http status] > > > > On Wednesday, Nov 5, 2003, at 14:20 Europe/Rome, Unico Hommes wrote: > > >> From: Gianugo Rabellino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> Sorry to jump in late, I'm probably lagging behind a few > posts, but > >> was the possibility of having *pipelines* send empty payload > >> considered instead? This way flow will always have to > sendPage(), but > >> the result would be empty content anyway. With the added bonus of > >> having the pipeline flexibility to, say, set headers. > >> > > > > But the function of a pipeline is specifically towards the > production > > of > > an xml response body. To have to set up all the components, > execute the > > pipeline and then fooling the pipeline to send its data to a null > > output > > or refrain from pipeline execution altogether? In some > scenarios that > > may be necessary, for instance in the case of the http HEAD > function. > > The point is, you shouldn't have to, because there are a lot of > > situations where its just unneccesary overhead. (for example all the > > dummy responses in the davmap sitemap) > > I'm with Unico here: the use of HTTP in a DeltaV scenario is > *massive* > and involves tons of requests/responses for even a simple operation > like moving a file. Many of these responses have no payload as the > result is contained in the response headers. > > Note, this *does not* imply that you shouldn't be able to use a > pipeline to do further processing (even if it results in no payload), > but I think it should *not* be forced upon us to have a "dummy > pipeline" just to satisfy these contraints. > > Different story for Reinhard's concern, I think it's a valid point: > most situations on the web handle requests that return a payload... > having a way to signal that "hey, you are missing your payload" is a > good debugging advice and we wouldn't want to loose this for those > "rare" (in comparison) payload-less responses. > > So, what about > > cocoon.sendEmptyResponse(status-code) > > ? >
I am +1 on the idea but would favor naming the method sendStatus instead, and also have a way to set the status on the environment from the flow without sending an empty response: - cocoon.sendStatus(status) - cocoon.sendStatus(status, message) - cocoon.response.setStatus(status) - cocoon.response.setStatus(status,message) +4 from me Cheers, Unico > -- > Stefano. > >
