Re: [jetty-dev] ProxyServlet customizeExchange : add parameter response

[Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas,

Yes, at first blush this looks like something we could accept as a
patch, it seems that the existing proxy servlet just has a couple of
good changes in it and the old api is still there.  Not sure about the
tweaks to the continuation suspends in there but I would have to apply
the patch and look at it in the full context.

next steps once you are done with the tests and whatnot is to to open
a bug at bugs.eclipse.org for this issue under RT/Jetty

Then you can either upload the patch there or push it into the new
gerrit setup: https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/q/status:open+project:jetty/org.eclipse.jetty.project,n,z

I am looking forward to this, pretty cool stuff, nice job!

jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx



On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 05:02, Thomas SEGISMONT <tsegismont@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> Attached is the patch and an example usage. It's not finished yet but it
> will look like this.
>
> If you're interested in having this jettty-servlets, tell me. Of course I'll
> add tests cases.
>
> If you have any comments on the solution, I would appreciate.
>
> Thanks
>
> Le 01/03/2012 20:23, Jesse McConnell a écrit :
>
>> I am interested to see what your doing and so long as its not going to
>> fundamentally break existing usage it would be nice to see the patch
>> for it.
>>
>> where possible respect the existing api :)
>>
>> cheers,
>> jesse
>>
>> --
>> jesse mcconnell
>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:54, Thomas SEGISMONT<tsegismont@xxxxxxxxx>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Going further on my prototype, I realize that in order to add other
>>> functionalities (back-end balancing, sticky sessions, ...) I'll need more
>>> customizations than I pushed in this change set :
>>> https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/5211/
>>>
>>> So I have set it abandoned in Gerrit.
>>>
>>> Are you interested in having such functionalities in ProxyServlet ? If so
>>> i
>>> can push a more complete change set later.
>>>
>>> Otherwise I'll make my own servlet (without taking into account backward
>>> compatibility issues).
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Le 01/03/2012 13:43, Thomas SEGISMONT a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the quick answer and sorry for waking you up ;)
>>>>
>>>> I'll push a changeset to gerrit. Which branch should I base the change
>>>> on
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Le 01/03/2012 12:48, Jesse McConnell a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> we will certainly take a look, need a coffee before I consider it
>>>>> right or not :)
>>>>>
>>>>> feel free to open a bugzilla and attached the patch or push the patch
>>>>> into gerrit for review
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/q/project:jetty/org.eclipse.jetty.project,n,z
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>> jesse
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> jesse mcconnell
>>>>> jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 05:02, Thomas SEGISMONT<tsegismont@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm trying to build a http transparent proxy, similar to what you get
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> Apache mod_proxy, ProxyPass and ProxyPassReverse. So I need to
>>>>>> intercept
>>>>>> response headers sent by the back-end server ( Location,
>>>>>> Content-Location
>>>>>> and URI).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a servlet which extends ProxyServlet.Transparent and overrides
>>>>>> method
>>>>>> customizeExchange :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Override
>>>>>> protected void customizeExchange(HttpExchange exchange,
>>>>>> HttpServletRequest
>>>>>> request)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    exchange.setEventListener(new
>>>>>> ProxyEventListener(exchange.getEventListener(), request));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here I miss a reference to the HttpServletResponse instance. I'd like
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> have :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Override
>>>>>> protected void customizeExchange(HttpExchange exchange,
>>>>>> HttpServletRequest
>>>>>> request, HttpServletResponse response)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    exchange.setEventListener(new
>>>>>> ProxyEventListener(exchange.getEventListener(), request, response));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would you accept a patch like this ? Or do you think there's another
>>>>>> way
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> do the job ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> jetty-dev mailing list
>>>>>> jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> jetty-dev mailing list
>>>>> jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jetty-dev mailing list
>>> jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jetty-dev mailing list
>> jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jetty-dev mailing list
> jetty-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-dev
>