About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
Locked
About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
 
|
Hi guys
we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). Stef |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: > Hi guys > > we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. > Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) > So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 > then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. my two cents, Norbert |
|
|
I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not.
As I remember form the past was not planned to support for example https, which prevent to use OAuth and OpenID, very needed to develop any interaction against any modern web site. Cheers. Germán. 2011/4/16 Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]>: > > Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: > >> Hi guys >> >> we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. >> Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) >> So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 >> then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). > > This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. > I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. > And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! > And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. > > my two cents, > > Norbert > > > |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
I have a couple of question, not about Zn but the process:
1) Stef, you are talking about just to put Zn in the image or REPLACE all uses of HTTP to use Zn? 2) It may be difficult to replace that since Monticello use it -> be carfeul ! 3) How are you going to depreacate HTTP? 4) Does Zn mantains the same API as HTTP ? what happen with external packages? will the API change? Cheers Mariano On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Germán Arduino <[hidden email]> wrote: I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not. -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by garduino
Am 16.04.2011 um 15:13 schrieb Germán Arduino: > I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not. > What do you mean with features? > As I remember form the past was not planned to support for example > https, which prevent to use OAuth and OpenID, very needed to develop > any interaction against any modern web site. > Zinc is http handling components. Https is just a http request over a transparently initiated SSL connection. So if you have SSL you have https. It is not the duty of an http component to support SSL. A url handler needs to integrate existing SSL. As far as I remember the cloudfork guys have OAuth running. So they must have SSL. So it shouldn't be to hard to do the same with zinc. Just exchange the http handling routines. Norbert > 2011/4/16 Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]>: >> >> Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: >> >>> Hi guys >>> >>> we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. >>> Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) >>> So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 >>> then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). >> >> This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. >> I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. >> And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! >> And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. >> >> my two cents, >> >> Norbert >> >> >> > |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Am 16.04.2011 um 15:52 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck: I have a couple of question, not about Zn but the process: 2) It may be difficult to replace that since Monticello use it -> be carfeul ! 3) How are you going to depreacate HTTP? What do you mean? The HTTP classes in Network-Protocols or http the protocol) :) 4) Does Zn mantains the same API as HTTP ? what happen with external packages? will the API change?I don't like the current API at all and I'm glad Zinc is different. But for legacy purposes a facade should be easy to implement that resembles the existing one. On the long run some of the calls should vanish and only the httpGet: and friends should survive to offer a really really easy and basic access to http. my 2 cents, Norbert Cheers |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by garduino
Am 16.04.2011 um 15:13 schrieb Germán Arduino: > I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not. > > As I remember form the past was not planned to support for example > https, which prevent to use OAuth and OpenID, very needed to develop > any interaction against any modern web site. > Btw. if you want to use OAuth etc. you usually only need outbound SSL to one or a few hosts. For this you can use a webserver like nginx that does proxy pass to a SSL host or you can use stunnel on the machine that does the SSL wrapper. There are a few people reading this list which do exactly this :) Norbert > Cheers. > Germán. > > > 2011/4/16 Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]>: >> >> Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: >> >>> Hi guys >>> >>> we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. >>> Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) >>> So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 >>> then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). >> >> This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. >> I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. >> And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! >> And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. >> >> my two cents, >> >> Norbert >> >> >> > |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by NorbertHartl
Hello,
Yes, CloudforkSSO has support for OAuth1, AOuth2 and OpenID. Cloudfork uses Zinc as HTTP client library. Works very well. Indeed, SSL is not supported directly. But using stunnel [1] is a good workaround for this.
Jan. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
|
|
2011/4/16 Jan van de Sandt <[hidden email]>:
> Hello, > Yes, CloudforkSSO has support for OAuth1, AOuth2 and OpenID. Cloudfork uses > Zinc as HTTP client library. Works very well. > Indeed, SSL is not supported directly. But using stunnel [1] is a good > workaround for this. Yes I understand your and Norbert point but, as you comment is a workaround. I honestly prefer the way of WebClient, when only need to have a plugin, but may be are different visions. Cheers. |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
On Apr 16, 2011, at 3:52 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > I have a couple of question, not about Zn but the process: > > 1) Stef, you are talking about just to put Zn in the image or REPLACE all uses of HTTP to use Zn? what would be the point? Key a crappy implementation? For what purpose > 2) It may be difficult to replace that since Monticello use it -> be carfeul ! No sven already use it since months for that > 3) How are you going to depreacate HTTP? ? Simply. Fixing all the clients. > 4) Does Zn mantains the same API as HTTP ? Why should it be? > what happen with external packages? They will have time to migrate. > will the API change? probably since the current one is plain bad. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Germán Arduino <[hidden email]> wrote: > I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not. > > As I remember form the past was not planned to support for example > https, which prevent to use OAuth and OpenID, very needed to develop > any interaction against any modern web site. > > Cheers. > Germán. > > > 2011/4/16 Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]>: > > > > Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: > > > >> Hi guys > >> > >> we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. > >> Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) > >> So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 > >> then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). > > > > This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. > > I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. > > And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! > > And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. > > > > my two cents, > > > > Norbert > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by NorbertHartl
On Apr 16, 2011, at 5:45 PM, Norbert Hartl wrote: > > Am 16.04.2011 um 15:52 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck: > >> I have a couple of question, not about Zn but the process: >> >> 1) Stef, you are talking about just to put Zn in the image or REPLACE all uses of HTTP to use Zn? > > I would hope so. I think it would be easy to provide a facade with the current API that uses Zinc. I do not think that we need such facade. >> 2) It may be difficult to replace that since Monticello use it -> be carfeul ! > > If I remember correctly Sven has tested monticello from an early stage on. And it seems to be a reliable thing to use. Sven uses it dialy for MC. >> 3) How are you going to depreacate HTTP? > > What do you mean? The HTTP classes in Network-Protocols or http the protocol) :) > >> 4) Does Zn mantains the same API as HTTP ? what happen with external packages? will the API change? >> > I don't like the current API at all and I'm glad Zinc is different. But for legacy purposes a facade should be easy to implement that resembles the existing one. which legacy :) ? > On the long run some of the calls should vanish and only the httpGet: and friends should survive to offer a really really easy and basic access to http. exactly. Let us move on. Stef > > my 2 cents, > > Norbert > >> Cheers >> >> Mariano >> >> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Germán Arduino <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not. >> >> As I remember form the past was not planned to support for example >> https, which prevent to use OAuth and OpenID, very needed to develop >> any interaction against any modern web site. >> >> Cheers. >> Germán. >> >> >> 2011/4/16 Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]>: >> > >> > Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: >> > >> >> Hi guys >> >> >> >> we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. >> >> Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) >> >> So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 >> >> then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). >> > >> > This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. >> > I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. >> > And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! >> > And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. >> > >> > my two cents, >> > >> > Norbert >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mariano >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> > |
Re: About Zinc to replace HTTPClient
|
|
In reply to this post by Jan van de Sandt
On Apr 16, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Jan van de Sandt wrote: > Hello, > > Yes, CloudforkSSO has support for OAuth1, AOuth2 and OpenID. Cloudfork uses Zinc as HTTP client library. Works very well. Excellent news. Thanks for the information. > > Indeed, SSL is not supported directly. But using stunnel [1] is a good workaround for this. > > Jan. > > [1] http://blog.doit.st/2011/02/23/cloudforksso-on-pharo-with-stunnel/ > > > > On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Am 16.04.2011 um 15:13 schrieb Germán Arduino: > > > I would like to know exactly what features will provide Zn and which not. > > > What do you mean with features? > > > As I remember form the past was not planned to support for example > > https, which prevent to use OAuth and OpenID, very needed to develop > > any interaction against any modern web site. > > > Zinc is http handling components. Https is just a http request over a transparently initiated SSL connection. So if you have SSL you have https. It is not the duty of an http component to support SSL. A url handler needs to integrate existing SSL. > As far as I remember the cloudfork guys have OAuth running. So they must have SSL. So it shouldn't be to hard to do the same with zinc. Just exchange the http handling routines. > > Norbert > > > 2011/4/16 Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]>: > >> > >> Am 15.04.2011 um 22:12 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse: > >> > >>> Hi guys > >>> > >>> we discuss with sven about strategies to get a better infrastructure and the HTTP level. > >>> Sven would like to have feedback on Zinc before pushing it in Pharo :) > >>> So can you let us know. What we could do it to have it in a preview in 1.3 > >>> then in 1.4 remove HTTPClient (or friend). > >> > >> This is really good. To me (meaning IMHO) it is one of the most missing functionalities in pharo. Zinc is really great and so much better than _anything_ in pharo that pretends to do HTTP. I would like to see it that we don't talk about HTTP but about proper MIME based communication. I think the very core that is in there is the structured and flexible mime media handling and communication. And this is not only true for HTTP but also for email. > >> I would like to see that Zinc creeping into the image bringing the mime stuff along. Than the mime stuff should break loose of the Zinc components and should replace the mime handling that is in the image. Than we have it for http and for mail sending and for every other transport protocol you can imagine. > >> And now that Paul ported zinc to gemstone you can develop good http handlers that are easily ported to gemstone. What a wonderful world! > >> And seaside? Well, if the current http adaptors are much faster than zinc than there should be shortcut path through zinc that allows fast handling of the minimal stuff seaside needs. The same problem goes for the WARequest stuff. Using zinc you can get access to the mime parts. Now WARequest is a strange request object that contains a dictionary for request parameters and a raw message body. If only compatibility is important than a zinc to old WARequest handling is needed. But I would like to see the mime based handling to be the "normal" way of doing and not vice versa. But I can see that it must be a special treatment as seaside is ported to so many platforms that don't have zinc. Probably one reasone more to extract the mime stuff. It might be a promininent candidate other platforms adopt. > >> > >> my two cents, > >> > >> Norbert > >> > >> > >> > > > > > |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |