Skip to content

Conversation

@njaard
Copy link

@njaard njaard commented Aug 31, 2020

with my "anysocket" crate

Implements #172

Copy link
Collaborator

@rawler rawler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not familiar enough with the code to approve, but the PR looks straight-forward enough. I think a test, testing actual unix-socket functionality is in order though.

@tomaka
Copy link
Member

tomaka commented Sep 4, 2020

I would personally be against this type of change, as it strongly looks like a feature creep to me.
That being said, I'm not maintaining this crate anymore, so my word isn't very relevant here.

@njaard
Copy link
Author

njaard commented Sep 4, 2020

@tomaka Unix Domain sockets are an essential part of the socket world. They're important for hosting via reverse proxies

@rawler
Copy link
Collaborator

rawler commented Jan 10, 2021

Hi. Thank you for the PR.

While I'm myself on the fence on the value of http-servers on unix sockets, it's importance is demonstrated by the fact that two PR:s have been devised for this.

However of the two approaches, considering anysocket seems to be a one-man effort, at 0.1 release, and with no other dependent crates, I'd strongly avoid adding that as a dependency for tiny-http. I'm therefore going to close this PR.

If you still want to contribute, since you're obviously knowledgeable in the field, I'd value your input on #187.

@rawler rawler closed this Jan 10, 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.

3 participants