[Cuis] Was a consensus reached re: HTTP/HTTPS?

[H. Hirzel]

Splitting up the tests into a separate package is a good thing in any
case. Please just go ahead with it. Then fixing the tests is an issue
of quality assurance for the WebClient package.

On 3/9/15, Phil (list) <pbpublist at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-03-09 at 14:04 -0500, David Graham wrote:
>> I’d be honored to see the WebClient port included in the core Packages and
>> I’m fine with any decision Juan makes.  I really like the Cuis philosophy,
>> so most of the porting involved rewriting code to conform to what is
>> available in Cuis.
>>
>> Just a couple notes:
>> 1. The Cuis-DigitalSignatures and Cuis-UUID packages in my repo should be
>> imported as well.  These invoke VM primitives and should remain
>> independent.
>> 2. I've used the the WebClient code on my own, without trouble, but the
>> unit tests are very broken and I haven’t had enough spare time to fix
>> these.
>>
>> Also, the Cuis-SecureSocket package in my repo is a port of the SqueakSSL
>> code.  This code works, but needs a lot of attention.  I had a trivial
>> Cuis update app that monitored and could install CoreUpdates directly from
>> github, but github switched to using TLS SNI and the SNI update hasn’t
>> made  its way into the Squeak VM plugin yet:
>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7824
>>
>
> One other thing that would probably need to be done is to split out the
> tests into a separate package(s).  If it is decided to go with
> WebClient, I can help with fixing up the tests.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cuis mailing list
> Cuis at jvuletich.org
> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>