On 6 April 2015 at 20:49, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote: > On 6 April 2015 at 19:02, Lieven Govaerts <l...@mobsol.be> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: serf-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:serf-...@googlegroups.com] On >>>> Behalf Of s...@googlecode.com >>>> Sent: maandag 6 april 2015 11:25 >>>> To: serf-...@googlegroups.com >>>> Subject: [serf-dev] [serf] r2489 committed - In preparation of serf 1.4.0, >>>> remove the get_remaining function from t... >>>> >>>> Revision: 2489 >>>> Author: lieven.govaerts >>>> Date: Mon Apr 6 09:24:18 2015 UTC >>>> Log: In preparation of serf 1.4.0, remove the get_remaining function >>>> from the >>>> bucket API. >>>> >>>> This reverts most of r2008, r2009, r2010 and r2198. From r2008 I kept the >>>> read_bucket_v2 function, which is needed for set_config. >>> >>> If we still keep the read_bucket_v2 feature, what is the reason for just >>> removing get_remaining? >>> >> >> I'm fixing all TODO's as discussed in the summer last year. >> Get_remaining isn't finished yet and not used. So instead of waiting >> until someone uses it, I'm removing it now so we can get 1.4 branched. >> >> We can still revert this revision after 1.4.x is branched though. In >> fact, we can release 1.5.x with just this if an application wants to >> make use of the (finalized) get_remaining feature. >> > What problem do we have with get_remaining() feature except > read_bucket_v2() linkage problems? get_remaining() feature is not used > in Subversion for only one reason: serf-trunk has version 2.0.0 so > it's not possible to add version detection code. > > Hi Lieven,
I still don't understand your arguments on reverting get_remaining() feature. Why you consider get_remaining() as isn't finished? The read_bucket_v2() linking problem also apply to your serf_config_t feature, but we didn't reverted it from trunk. Also adding this feature latter will require read_bucket_v3() which increase the mess. -- Ivan Zhakov
