Re: [resteasy-dev] Proposed changes to org.jboss.resteasy.client.jaxrs.engines.ApacheHttpClient4Engine

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ron Sigal" <rsigal(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: resteasy-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 9:26:36 PM > Subject: Re: [resteasy-dev] Proposed changes to org.jboss.resteasy.client.jaxrs.engines.ApacheHttpClient4Engine > > Hi Rebecca, > > Following up on our discussion during today's meeting, changing that > constructor would introduce a new behavior that may break someone's code. > That was the point of the discussion in RESTEASY-975. So we have to come to > some decision about how to manage changes like this. Should we have, as you > suggested, a 3.0.x branch that maintains the current behavior, so that a > change like this can be introduced into master (or whatever ends up serving > as master for 3.1.x)? My concern is that fixes for older bugs [not that we > will ever introduce any new bugs ;-) ] will have to be applied to two > branches. More work, but now we have more people. I don't know. Is that > considered a best practice? Just wondering. > > By the way, other issues that may (or may not) be related: > > * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-906 I don't see this one as directly related to RESTEASY-1357. Its a secondary issue. > * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-1089 This one is directly related. I've linked it to the RESTEASY-1357 > * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-1192 I think this is a secondary issue as well. > -Ron > > > > On 05/15/2016 11:36 PM, Weinan Li wrote: > > > > Hi Rebecca, > > Here are two relative issues maybe you'll be interested in: > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-975 > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RESTEASY-1023 - Weinan Li > > > > On May 16, 2016, at 4:01 AM, Rebecca Searls <rsearls(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > I'm cleaning up the deprecated apache classes in resteasy-client. > I am currently working on > org.jboss.resteasy.client.jaxrs.engines.ApacheHttpClient4Engine. > One of four ApacheHttpClient4Engine constructor methods is using the > deprecated class > org.apache.http.impl.client.DefaultHttpClient. > > public ApacheHttpClient4Engine() > { > this.httpClient = new DefaultHttpClient(); > this.createdHttpClient = true; > } > > Apache's (version 4.3) requirement is to use a HttpClientBuilder to generated > a new HttpClient > object. I can generated the HttpClient using Builder, HOWEVER doing so will > mean a HttpHost > can never be assigned to the this.httpClient object. > > I propose doing the following to address this. > > 1) Implement the no-arg constructor using the new Builder procedure. > Adding Javadoc comments of the restriction to this constructor. > 2) Create a new constructor method that requires the input argument of > HttpHost > and generates the HttpClient using the Builder procedure. > > > > ApacheHttpClient4Engine methods getDefaultProxy setDefaultProxy are obsolete. > A HttpPort object can not longer be set or retrieved from HttpClient using > org.apache.http.params.HttpParams. > > I don't find any Resteasy code calling getDefaultProxy. There is only 1 call > to setDefaultProxy which is easily addressed. > Since both methods are public, I propose the following changes. > > 1) Tag both methods deprecated. > 2) getDefaultProxy() will always return NULL; > 3) setDefaultProxy() will do nothing. > 4) Add Javadoc to both methods. > > Comments and suggestions on these proposals would be appreciated. > _______________________________________________ > resteasy-dev mailing list resteasy-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/resteasy-dev > _______________________________________________ > resteasy-dev mailing list resteasy-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/resteasy-dev > > -- > My company's smarter than your company (unless you work for Red Hat) > > _______________________________________________ > resteasy-dev mailing list > resteasy-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/resteasy-dev >