[Cuis] Choosing an HTTP framework

[Germán Arduino]

Hi Guys:

Ok, I will try to comment my attempts.

I think that Zinc is currently the best maintained http framework
(client but also have a server version and a secure server version
(ssl) named Zodiac).

My goal is port my package XMLRPC that would permit to Cuis interact
with different web services exposing an xmlrpc api.

But also I would like to have Iliad (a nice and innovative web
framework) in Cuis. Iliad currently use Swazoo as web server (also
exist some Comanche stuff). But I would like to develop an adapter to
have support with the Zinc server. The goal is that in a stock image,
having Zinc, is pretty easy to install Iliad and have a complete web
development environment.

Currently I imported the Zinc code in Cuis 4 and using the tests, I
started fixing and adapting different stuff:

https://github.com/garduino/Cuis-Pharo14CompatibilityLayer (Here I've
different packages (not all are for Zinc) to make possible to load
Zinc from its .mcz without errors).

The consideration is that Zinc AFAIK is based on the underlying http
support on Pharo, then I ported some classes (the ones that Zinc seems
to need) as Cuis-Network-MIME.pck, Cuis-Network-Url.pck and
Cuis-Pharo14CLayer.pck (it's a place where I grouped some method
classes).

Now I'm thinking what is the minimal portion of classes that I
could/should port to make the tests of ZnCharacterEncoderTests work.

In the meantime, I (almost) ported JSON and found similar
considerations (not equals), then I ported some portions that helped
me load and run most of JSON tests, they are:

Cuis-Multilingual-Encodings.pck - Cuis-Multilingual-Languages.pck -
Cuis-System-Localization.pck but I'm still with one failing test,
related with encoding questions (I'm not sure how I will solve, need
to get some free time to work on this).

Then, this is the status ( a bit confuse, I know ) of my work with Zinc.

BTW, the current Cuis packages for Zinc are in:
https://github.com/garduino/Cuis-Zinc

Please, read the README, I'm interested in know opinions also about
the naming convention.

Well, sorry if the whole stuff is a bit confusing......ask anything
that need clarification.

Cheers.




2012/5/23 Juan Vuletich <juan at jvuletich.org>:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm starting this thread to have a clear discussion about this.
>
> In a different thread, Casey said:
>
>>> I've been struggling to get WebClient/WebServer working in Cuis for
>>> awhile now.
>
> Germán said:
>
>>> As I've said before I adapted some stuff to make a compatibility layer
>>> with Pharo, to permit install smoothly new versions of Zinc (This is
>>> the goal). But started to check big differences at encoding level....
>
> I said:
>
>>> I agree. Let's start this by sharing the work... Please answer to this
>>> mail with any alternatives you know of (please include a link to the
>>> most current code). I'll compile the list, and maybe if we discuss pros
>>> and cons, we can settle on one. Then we'll decide if we want to be
>>> compatible with it, or to port it (and maintain it).
>
> We need to pick an http framework. It would be best to be compatible with
> the most used and best maintained one, and not fork it. I haven't been
> following them, so I can't say much. So far, candidates would be Zinc and
> WebClient/WebServer. Anyone suggest other options? Germán, Casey, please
> answer to this threads with comments on the status of your efforts, links to
> code, what you expect to be able to do and how we can do it together.
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cuis mailing list
> Cuis at jvuletich.org
> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org