Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:51:32 -0800 hgweb: send errors using new response API
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:51:32 -0800] rev 36879
hgweb: send errors using new response API Our slow march off of wsgirequest continues. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2795
Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:42:00 -0800 hgweb: refactor 304 handling code
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:42:00 -0800] rev 36878
hgweb: refactor 304 handling code We had generic code in wsgirequest for handling HTTP 304 responses. We also had a special case for it in the catch all exception handler in the WSGI application. We only ever raise 304 in one place. So, we don't need to treat it specially in the catch all exception handler. But it is useful to validate behavior of 304 responses. We port the code that sends a 304 to use the new response API. We then move the code for screening 304 sanity into the new response API. As part of doing so, we discovered that we would send Content-Length: 0. This is not allowed. So, we fix our response code to not emit that header for empty response bodies. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2794
Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:19:27 -0800 hgweb: transition permissions hooks to modern request type (API)
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:19:27 -0800] rev 36877
hgweb: transition permissions hooks to modern request type (API) We're trying to remove ``wsgirequest``. The permissions hooks don't do anything they can't do with our new request type. So let's pass that in. This was the last use of ``wsgirequest`` in the wire protocol code! .. api:: hgweb.hgweb_mod.permhooks no longer take a ``wsgirequest`` instance as an argument. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2793
Sat, 10 Mar 2018 20:16:20 -0800 hgweb: port archive command to modern response API
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Sat, 10 Mar 2018 20:16:20 -0800] rev 36876
hgweb: port archive command to modern response API Well, I tried to go with PEP 3333's recommendations and only allow our WSGI application to emit data via a response generator. Unfortunately, the "archive" command calls into the zipfile and tarfile modules and these operator on file objects and must send their data to an object with write(). There's no easy way turn these write() calls into a generator. So, we teach our response type how to expose a file object like object that can be used to write() output. We try to keep the API consistent with how things work currently: callers must call a setbody*(), then sendresponse() to trigger sending of headers, and only then can they get a handle on the object to perform writing. This required overloading the return value of @webcommand functions even more. Fortunately, we're almost completely ported off the legacy API. So we should be able to simplify matters in the near future. A test relying on this functionality has also been updated to use the new API. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2792
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -4 +4 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 tip