[no subject]

The user-agent string is not an issue.  We can control that from the mozilla
component, nautilus, the proxy, and/or gnome-http easily.  Cookies I'm not sure
about.  The mozilla component can handle cookies and I don't know anywhere else
in the scheme of things they are relavent.

Another concern right now is that gnome-vfs is not stable enough to base a
reliable service model on.
Gnome-gttp, although a little simplisitic, is very stable and reliable.  It must
be rock solid if we are going to use it for transferring large amounts of data.

So, in a nutshell, we are using alot of different networking libraries because
none of them provide all of the functionality that we need.

-Shane

Darin Adler wrote:

> > I don't really know why we're using ghttp anywhere - we should be using
> > gnome-vfs wherever we're currently using ghttp (in my opinion). Its not
> > that gnome-vfs is better, its just that we already depend on it, and
> > if we can reduce the number of dependancies thats a good thing. It will
> > also help us avoid problems like the ones in:
> > components/services/install/lib/eazel-install-protocols.c
> > where there are functions called http_fetch_remote_file,
> > ftp_fetch_remote_file and local_fetch_remote_file. The http one uses ghttp,
> > the local one uses regular local filesystem calls, and the ftp one returns
> > an error. I we use gnome-vfs for all of these we only need to write the
> > function once - and FTP would work :-)
>
> I agree that using gnome-vfs instead would be a good idea in theory. In
> practice I don't know if the current version of gnome-vfs provides enough
> error handling and control. In an attempt to abstract the difference between
> things like http and local files we currently hide many details that may
> need to be exposed if we want gnome-vfs to be useful in cases like this.
>
> > Of more concern is the fact that all of the HTTP libraries will maintain
> > separate sets of cookies, authentication info, referrer history, and have
> > different user-agent strings. Ramiro tells me we can share the auth info
> > between gnome-vfs and mozilla fairly easily, but the rest are could be a
> > problem.
>
> Does gnome-vfs maintain cookies at all? What about this other stuff? As far
> as I know, these issues are pretty-much all ignored by the current gnome-vfs
> HTTP implementation.
>
>     -- Darin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nautilus-list mailing list
> Nautilus-list lists eazel com
> http://www.eazel.com/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list