> On Jan. 17, 2014, 11:52 p.m., Charlie Carson wrote:
> > 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/http.hpp, line 503
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/17076/diff/1/?file=429763#file429763line503>
> >
> > this is probably a API consistency question and I'm the new guy - but
> > to me, a post w/o either a body or a contentType is incorrect. The entire
> > purpose of a POST is to upload a body and you need to know the content type
> > to know what to do with the body when it arrives.
>
> Jie Yu wrote:
> ContentType is not mandatory as far as I know. The server can infer the
> ContentType.
>
> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec7.html#sec7.2.1
>
> One can choose to POST an empty request (no body). In that case,
> ContentType is not needed.
someone up here mention /quitquitquit being a good example of POST w/ no body,
so that's definitely a good point. OTOH, the spec says "Any HTTP/1.1 message
containing an entity-body SHOULD include a Content-Type header field". so that
makes me want to do two overloads:
Future<Response> post(const UPID& upid, const Option<string>& path)
Future<Response> post(const UPID& upid, const Option<string>& path, const
string& contentType, const string& body)
but the second overload won't compile... the other option would be to have a
little struct which represents a entity-body - ex:
struct Content {
string contentType;
string body;
}
then you could have a single overload for post:
Future<Response> post(const UPID& upid, const Option<string>& path, const
Option<PostContent>& content)
that's nice b/c it would position you for posting things like the contents of a
file or a stream (like the HttpResponse does).
That said, we are DEFINITELY into deep api / framework style at this point and
I'll defer to you.
Feel free to close the issue.
- Charlie
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/17076/#review32226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 17, 2014, 11:41 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/17076/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 17, 2014, 11:41 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Charlie Carson.
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> See summary.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> 3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/http.hpp a8b1636
> 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp 936f118
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17076/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> will include test fixes in the following patches.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jie Yu
>
>
