Re: Four patches for LWP (and comments)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Gisle Aas: "Re: Four patches for LWP (and comments)"
• Previous message: Paul Schinder: "Re: Comments on LWP from a Mac user"
• Maybe in reply to: Marc Hedlund: "Four patches for LWP (and comments)"
• Next in thread: Gisle Aas: "Re: Four patches for LWP (and comments)"

> If the HTTP classes are divorced from the LWP model, there's no reason
> they can't be put elsewhere.
>  
> > I advocate for, at least,
> > 
> > HTTP::
> > ::Message
> >         ::Request
> >         ::Response
> > ::Headers
> > ::Status
> 
> Yup, looks fine to me.

There seem to be general agreement about this issue, so lets do it.  I guess 
we should then get rid of HTTP::Message's dependency on LWP::MemberMixin?

How about this:

    HTTP::
    ::Message
      ::Request
      ::Response
    ::Headers
    ::Status    (or ::StatusCode)
    ::Date

    MIME::
    ::Types

    URI::
    ::URL

    LWP::
    ::MemberMixin
      ::UserAgent
      ::Protocol
        ::Protocol::http
        ::Protocol::gopher
        ...
    ::Socket
    ::Debug
    ::Base64
    ::Simple

If everyone can agree on this I'll make the change for the next release.

--Gisle

• Next message: Gisle Aas: "Re: Four patches for LWP (and comments)"
• Previous message: Paul Schinder: "Re: Comments on LWP from a Mac user"
• Maybe in reply to: Marc Hedlund: "Four patches for LWP (and comments)"
• Next in thread: Gisle Aas: "Re: Four patches for LWP (and comments)"