Hello Trustin,
re-inventing the wheel is never a good thing. To me, it sounds
reasonable that HttpComponents and MINA cooperate on the client
side, at least for the higher level functionality. There is of
course some kind of competition on the lower levels, where
HttpNIO and MINA address similar
Hello Roland,
Thanks for the response. Let's wait and see how people think about
this issue. Probably Jeff will also have something to say. :)
Cheers,
Trustin
On Nov 23, 2007 3:06 AM, Roland Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Trustin,
re-inventing the wheel is never a good thing. To me,
Trustin Lee wrote:
2) I also think mina-protocol-http-client module needs more work to
provide enough features to compare with existing HTTP client libraries
such as Jakarta HttpComponents, so moving it into sandbox might be a
better solution considering that we are going to release MINA
Whoops and forgot to mention...this version also has response timeouts
working as well.
Jeff
Jeff Genender wrote:
Trustin Lee wrote:
2) I also think mina-protocol-http-client module needs more work to
provide enough features to compare with existing HTTP client libraries
such as Jakarta
Hi,
I'd like to discuss 2 ideas in this post. (Apologies for cross-posting ;)
1) What do you think about merging existing mina-protocol-http-client
module into asyncweb? Then AsyncWeb could be a one stop solution for
HTTP client-server communication. Now the codec is separated from
them into
