On Thu, 2018-07-12 at 09:35 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:18 PM Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 10:01 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 8:55 AM Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.o > > > rg> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 08:40 -0600, Gary Gregory wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > In my apps, I usually have this enum, handy for > > > > > parameterizing > > > > > things > > > > > like > > > > > tests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is already one called StandardMethods. Would that be > > > > enough? > > > > > > > > > > Yes :-) but I can add factory methods to create request objects > > > as in > > > my > > > version (Using the version 5 interface instead of 4)? For > > > example: > > > > > > > This would make StandardMethods dependent on the classic I/O model, > > which is not ideal in my option. What is wrong with just having a > > factory class (which can be an enum if that suits you)? > > > > So basically the enum I started this thread with but called > ClassicHttpRequests > (or ClassicHttpRequestFactory) in HttpClient? >
ClassicHttpRequests works for me. Can you make HttpRequests for generic requests as well? Oleg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
