Announcing LittleProxy 0.1 based on Netty

[Trustin Lee (이희승)]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Sebastian Andersson <bofh69 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 08:44, Adam Fisk <a at littleshoot.org> wrote:
>> It's proving slightly more involved than I expected to get a solid Netty
>> patch together, Stephen -- looks like it'll take me a little longer. We
>> basically just need to make the protocol version modifiable in
>> DefaultHttpResponse/HttpMessage and change it in HttpMessageDecoder when we
>> add chunked encoding, but fatigue is getting the best of me. Should be done
>> soon though.
>
> I had the same problem in a proxy of mine, but I just created a new
> DefaultHttpResponse with the new version and copied the content from
> the old object so I didn't have to change any part of Netty just for
> that.

Do you guys think it's better to make some properties writable?  URI,
method, status are the only immutable properties at the moment.

Also, HttpChunk is completely immutable unlike HttpMessage, which
makes me think it might be an API design problem (inconsistency).
Should we make HttpChunk mutable, too?

Feed back appreciated!

Cheers,
Trustin

PS: Congratulations for a great project, Adam!  I should create a page
about 'related projects'. :)

>
> /Sebastian
>
>
>> -Adam
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Adam Fisk <a at littleshoot.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Fantastic catch, Stephen!  I'll have to add it in to LittleProxy this
>>> evening - running around a bit today. Seems like a patch to
>>> HttpResponseDecoder is in order, and I can tackle that if you don't
>>> get to it first. I'm also happy to give you commit permissions if you
>>> like. This in particular is clearly a Netty and not a LittleProxy
>>> issue, but I can give you access to the repo if you need to make any
>>> changes going forward.
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking the time.
>>>
>>> -Adam
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Stephen Haberman
>>> <stephen at exigencecorp.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> The hard part is the testing cycles. I'm thinking it might make the
>>> >> most sense to just run a server that returns that file for every
>>> >> request, completely bypassing Netty and allowing us to easily tweak
>>> >> details of the response.
>>> >
>>> > Yeah, that is what netcat allowed me to do--it took the raw bytes in the
>>> > file (e.g. headers + content) and dumped them onto the wire when the
>>> > browser hit http://localhost:8080. So then I could edit the file,
>>> > run netcat, hit it with the browser, etc.
>>> >
>>> > Turns out it's the HTTP version--change the first line of the response
>>> > from:
>>> >
>>> >    HTTP/1.0 200 OK
>>> >
>>> > To:
>>> >
>>> >    HTTP/1.1 200 OK
>>> >
>>> > And firefox loads it successfully now.
>>> >
>>> > Makes sense, in that transfer encoding must be a HTTP 1.1 feature, and
>>> > the originating server was sending it as a HTTP 1.0 complaint request,
>>> > but the proxy upgrades it to an HTTP 1.1 request without bumping the
>>> > version number.
>>> >
>>> > - Stephen
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > netty-users mailing list
>>> > netty-users at lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Adam Fisk
>>> http://www.littleshoot.org | http://adamfisk.wordpress.com |
>>> http://twitter.com/adamfisk
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adam Fisk
>> http://www.littleshoot.org | http://adamfisk.wordpress.com |
>> http://twitter.com/adamfisk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netty-users mailing list
>> netty-users at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> One laptop per child project: http://laptop.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> netty-users mailing list
> netty-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>