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

refactor(core): remove attohttpc client, closes #6415 #6468

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 17, 2023

Conversation

lucasfernog
Copy link
Member

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Docs
  • New Binding issue #___
  • Code style update
  • Refactor
  • Build-related changes
  • Other, please describe:

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes, and the changes were approved in issue #___
  • No

Checklist

  • When resolving issues, they are referenced in the PR's title (e.g fix: remove a typo, closes #___, #___)
  • A change file is added if any packages will require a version bump due to this PR per the instructions in the readme.
  • I have added a convincing reason for adding this feature, if necessary

Other information

@lucasfernog lucasfernog requested a review from a team as a code owner March 17, 2023 01:07
FabianLars
FabianLars previously approved these changes Mar 17, 2023
Copy link
Member

@FabianLars FabianLars left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fwiw i really agree with this change 😅 If we need more reasons to merge this PR, here are the first two things i found in my todo list:
https://discord.com/channels/616186924390023171/1031003062774542426/1031230486527352912 (corrupt deflate stream)
https://discord.com/channels/616186924390023171/1074836726230548551 (attohttpc causing issues in the updater, don't know specifics)

Also it will probably make adding cookie support easier (since reqwest has built-in support)
and most rust devs use reqwest which caused binary bloat because our reqwest-client flag wasn't documented good enough - tbh i wouldn't know how to solve this with docs alone, why/where would people look for that in the first place...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants