From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8503A79DF7 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:44:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 712F91C742 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:43:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 06F221C737 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:43:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CF9C242A2C for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:43:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 09:43:31 +0200 From: Wolfgang Bumiller To: Dietmar Maurer Cc: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Message-ID: <20210506074331.by6cuf7pmr6nrq4f@wobu-vie.proxmox.com> References: <1181206651.274.1620286443593@webmail.proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1181206651.274.1620286443593@webmail.proxmox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.018 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH backup] client: use build_authority in build_uri X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 07:44:02 -0000 On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:34:03AM +0200, Dietmar Maurer wrote: > > On 05/06/2021 9:14 AM Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:01:46AM +0200, Dietmar Maurer wrote: > > > In general a good idea, but we now merge code > > > from two independent http client implementation (making them > > > dependent)? > > > > I mean... it's called "tools::http"... as in "http utilities", which > > IMO does not really sound like "this is an independent http client, > > which must not be reused"... ;-) > > What naming do you suggest instead? I suppose I'd put shared http stuff in `tools::http` and if the client should be separate I'd suggest `tools::http::client`, but I'm not convinced it cannot stay as is while sharing some code in the first place > > > And it's a rather thin layer around hyper (the *actual* client...) to > > add proxy support which, too, is something that we may at some point > > want to reuse without the rest of `SimpleHttp`, no? > > I am not sure if it is worth to reuse that for that backup client. We simply > do not need proxy support there. yet ;-)