openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Schmidt <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] replace neon with libwww (preferred) or libcurl (as 2. choice)
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:01:09 GMT
On 10/27/11 5:55 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
> i will continue my evaluation of libwww [1] as a replacement for the
> neon library that we can't use in the future because of the LGPL license.
> libwww would be the preferred replacement because of the WebDAV support.
> "Libwww is a highly modular, general-purpose client side Web API written
> in C for Unix and Windows (Win32). It's well suited for both small and
> large applications, like browser/editors, robots, batch tools, etc.
> Pluggable modules provided with libwww include complete HTTP/1.1 (with
> caching, pipelining, PUT, POST, Digest Authentication, deflate, etc),
> MySQL logging, FTP, HTML/4, XML (expat), RDF (SiRPAC), WebDAV, and much
> more."
> The license is BSD like and i was already in contact with one of the
> developers and they would be interested to grant it to Apache if there
> is enough interest to work on it in the future. It looks like an
> inactive project but they still receive patches from time to time and it
> is used in several projects. Well it is a complete implementation of a
> standard (HTTP 1.1) and besides bugfixes probably not too many things to
> do. Ok there is still room for improvements in some areas...
> Having such a HTTP client library written in C might be a good
> enhancement or extension of an existing Apache project. As far as i know
> there exists only Java based HTTP client libraries. Or as an own top
> level project if enough interested people are available.
> Anyway i will check if we can use it as a replacement for neon and based
> on the fact that it supports FTP as well, we can perhaps replace libcurl
> in then future too. But that is not so important at this time.
> If anybody is interested to help with this effort you are welcome.
> Beside the reimplementation of the WebDAV UCP (handles all http file
> access today) we have to integrate libwww in our build env as other
> external libs on all the supported platforms.
> If the evaluation fails and we can't use it we can use libcurl for plain
> http file access. And can later focus on WebDAV by using Apaches own
> stuff implemented in Java.
> Any opinions or objections others than Java is bad?

after posting this i found some further info which let me rethinking 
this approach and i would like to ask 2 questions first.

1. Does anybody already have some experience with libwww?

2. How important do you think is WebDAV support in the future?
- Nice to have as we had it before
- Important because widely used
- Not so important, we should better focus on CMIS integration

I don't want spent time on the wrong things and libcurl is of course 
widely used, already available in our build env and well accepted. My 
initial approach was perhaps too much focused on not losing WebDAV support.


> Juergen
> [1]

View raw message