[Libwebsockets] [PATCH 0/3] Some small fixes
andy at warmcat.com
Sat Dec 13 07:06:21 CET 2014
On 12/11/2014 12:09 AM, Alejandro Mery wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 11:08:42AM +0800, Andy Green wrote:
>> On 7 December 2014 10:36:10 GMT+08:00, Alejandro Mery <amery at geeks.cl> wrote:
>>> Because of the "Subject: [PATCH]:" prefix in the subject of the
>>> commits I wondered, what method do you prefer? github pull requests? or
>>> git format-patch + git am?
>>> Here is another dummy contribution, but using git send-email this time
>> Either way is fine for me, I appreciate the contributions.
>> I pushed this and your other patch about client protocol selection.
> there was a force push and the fix to getifaddrs.c got lost. I don't see
> the patches I sent either... because of that I sent a v2 of the client
> protocol selection fix better matching your original idea.
I'm sorry that's my fault, it's fixed now and everything should be pushed.
>> There's an outstanding patch modified from one that had to be reverted
>> on github, I did not get a chance to look at that yet or how it will
>> play with your change there. (In fact I am not sure what he's fixing
>> since it's something outside of test-server / client I think).
> I don't follow you :(
I meant there is another guy who has sent a pull request about the same code
I'd welcome your opinion on what he has done. He hasn't made a patch on
our basis and when I last tried to import his patch, it didn't apply.
His previous attempt killed the test client protocol negotiation and had
to be reverted.
I guess his problem is real but it's not reproduced on test server /
client which work OK already.
>> Thanks for the patches.
> my pleasure. Tomorrow I'll spam you again with an RFC patchset adding
> context->event_ops and fixing libev support for client usage to see if
> it matches what you had in mind.
> Alejandro Mery
More information about the Libwebsockets