I found your tone disappointing and to some degree upsetting, but I will try to stay objective. (I had a few hours to calm down.)<div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/2/3 Michael Snoyman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michael@snoyman.com">michael@snoyman.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Maybe I should have been more conservative in my previous comments:<br>
assuming that this http-types package is not vastly different than<br>
what I'm already using I can support it. I have no intention of<br>
breaking API compatibility for no reason. Neither change you've<br>
mentioned so far (Method and ditching CIByteString) seems like a wise<br>
move to me.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>First of all, it is simply not possible to avoid API breakage: WAI is not the only relevant package, even YOUR OWN package http-enumerator uses different types. Given that you break APIs almost regularly, I think you could find a way to do this.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Secondly, please provide reasons for why said things are not wise moves. If you want to command me, pay me or do this yourself, but given that you do neither, I demand explanations, reasoning and debate.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I did not even claim that I want to ditch CIByteString, just that I am unsure how to proceed with it.</div><div><br></div><div>Note that you yourself do not even use CIByteString consistently: You use it for the header names in WAI, but not for Method, and not at all in http-enumerator.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
It seems prudent to point out that WAI started off closer to the<br>
package you're designing now, and after input from others and some<br>
experience got to where it is now. I don't want it to take a step<br>
backwards.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It is probably irrational, but I take pride in what I do, and I do not like when people call it "a step backwards" without any explanation whatsoever.</div><div><br>
</div><div><br></div><div>Aristid</div></div></div>