Skip to content
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

#93: Added gzipped response support #101

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 3, 2016
Merged

Conversation

ewandennis
Copy link
Contributor

  • Request's gzip option now defaults to true with caller control
  • Bumped nock version to enable gzip support

 - Request's gzip option now defaults to true with caller control
 - Bumped nock version to enable gzip support
@aydrian
Copy link
Contributor

aydrian commented Feb 19, 2016

Did you do a --save when you npm installed the gzip library?
You need to make sure that the updated nock and zlib libraries are in the package.json

@ewandennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

This pr relies on node's own zlib module - no external gzip lib required and package.json has had the nock version bumped. The failing Travis report dies while writing its coverage report in node 0.10 which isn't too clear - will attempt to repro.

@ewandennis
Copy link
Contributor Author

I had a test that used zlib.gzipSync() which wasn't introduced until after node 0.10. I also didn't run the Mocha test suite against node 0.10. I just used the default grunt task which produces coverage data from the tests while sorta masking the test results themselves.

@aydrian
Copy link
Contributor

aydrian commented Mar 3, 2016

LGTM

aydrian added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2016
Added gzipped response support. Closes #93
@aydrian aydrian merged commit 7d12627 into SparkPost:master Mar 3, 2016
@aydrian aydrian changed the title #92: Added gzipped response support #93: Added gzipped response support Mar 3, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants