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

Add HttpsConnectorBuilder #145

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Add HttpsConnectorBuilder #145

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

g2p
Copy link
Contributor

@g2p g2p commented Feb 11, 2021

This gives more control over various rustls features,
as well as ensures that enabling connector features
like http2 can only be done when the appropriate crate
features are enabled.

Adds an hyper-rustls/http2 feature, fixing #143.

This is an alternative to the fix in #144, my motivation is that crate features can be activated at a remote whereas an explicit method call removes ambiguity.

This gives more control over various rustls features,
as well as ensures that enabling connector features
like http2 can only be done when the appropriate crate
features are enabled.

Adds an hyper-rustls/http2 feature.
These functions implicitly enabled certificate transparency,
keep that as well.
@paolobarbolini
Copy link
Contributor

I didn't see this when it was originally submitted but I agree this is better than doing it through a feature.

@g2p
Copy link
Contributor Author

g2p commented Sep 29, 2021

Do I need to do anything here? Now that #155 is waiting for this PR to be merged, I'd like to get this in as well.
I'm willing to work on this and @djc's update to rustls 0.20 in #153.
Since the rustls release brings nicer builders for rustls, I think building (rebasing) on top of #153 makes sense.
But I'd appreciate some guidance from whoever has the power to merge a PR (@lucab, @ctz).

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Sep 29, 2021

Rebasing this on top of #153 makes sense, I think (I can now also merge PRs in this project).

@djc
Copy link
Member

djc commented Nov 15, 2021

With #156, I think this is no longer needed, right?

@g2p
Copy link
Contributor Author

g2p commented Nov 15, 2021

Right!

@g2p g2p closed this Nov 15, 2021
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.

None yet

3 participants