-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 844
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Version 0.12 #829
Comments
Awesome work on getting a first HTTPCore release out there! I haven't been very active around here lately, but overall the plan proposed here sounds good to me. Although I might be tempted to have the bunch of current PRs in a 0.12 release, and then bring HTTPCore and unasync etc in 0.13? My rationale here would be, "let's get as much out of the way before switching the internals to HTTPCore". Perhaps we've also got a bunch of small fixes here and there that might benefit from being release soon rather than waiting for HTTPCore?
Alright, yeah. The |
I could gladly help, if that’s desirable! I’m using httpx a lot in the place I work. All of our new miroservices use it (with FastAPI), and although I’m running into some problems that need better understanding, I would love to make this library the goto standard for http communication in the future for any python developer! |
Shold we consider resolving #302 part of the roadmap to 1.0? |
@florimondmanca Nope not really. It's not an API blocker, so as much as I'd like to see any progress there, we've not got any need to block "this is the 1.0 API" against it. |
Seems like a sensible tack, yup. |
So, I've issued a first release of
httpcore
- the intent is that we should switch over from our existing dispatchers (urllib3 for sync, our own ConnectionPool for async) to the httpcore dispatchers (SyncConnectionPool and AsyncConnectionPool).The benefits for us doing so would be:
*Able to drop the
urllib3
dependancy, although we'll keep theurllib3
dispatcher as an optional alternative.I guess we're probably in a position to push for doing that in 0.12 release if we wanted, although it means significant churn so I think we should certainly issue a pre-release if that's what we want to do.
The #804 PR goes a long way towards switching around the interface to allow us to plug into it, although there's still a little more that'd need doing there (changing the url signature to
Tuple[bytes, bytes, int, bytes]
, changing the init arguments forhttpcore.AsyncConnectionPool
somewhat.)Other PRs that look like they ought to go in...
backend
from Client. Drop backend parameter on AsyncClient #791data
to not erronously accept dict-of-dicts. Don't support broken dict-of-dicts case for data argument. #811Client.close()
closes proxies. Close proxy dispatch classes on Client.close() #826Any more?
We'd also need to drop UDS support if we want to get
httpcore
in. I should have pushed back harded on it in the first place - as nice as it is to have features++ it doesn't really make the "feature set we need to focus on for 1.0".I'd also really appreciate anyone kicking the tyres of
httpcore
a bit. It could do with some documentation love, but there should be enough there for folks to give it a first try.What do we think? Is this a sensible point to aim at switching out to our unasync'ed backend? Is there anything I'm missing in considering this for a 0.12 release?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: