Provide high-level API to wire Celluloid::IO (socket classes, timeouts)

[ixti]

See: #203 (comment)

HTTP.backend(:celluloid)

[ixti]

I dislike name of the method actually, and propose to name it celluloid :D

HTTP.celluloid # => Celluloid-ready configured client 

[sferik]

For what it’s worth, I prefer your original suggestion. Hard-coding Celluloid configuration to a top-level method name limits the extensibility of this library.

[ixti]

@sferik #backend was actually Tony's proposal :)) I was thinking about sortening that to #use or #with, but after thinking on exisitng chainable API though that adding #celluloid into Chainable module will be a good idea.

Anyway, I agree that hard-coding celluloid config as a top-level method is not a good idea after all.

[sferik]

👍 for #use.

👎 for #with, since that used to be an alias for #with_headers. IMHO, changing the API in this way would be confusing.

My biggest objection to hardcoding #celluloid is that it wouldn’t be easily extensible to alternate configurations without monkey patching the HTTP object, which could result in method name collisions.

[tarcieri]

#use seems good to me

[zanker]

+1 on use, can we deprecate the old Api in 1.0 too? Could make config a lot easier

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 14, 2015, at 08:48, Tony Arcieri notifications@github.com wrote:

#use seems good to me

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[ixti]

I would like not to deprecate but completely drop out any things we want to deprecate. :D

UPDATE: in 1.0.0 release i mean

[tarcieri]

Celluloid::IO support is effectively dropped in 1.0. It's something we can revive, but it requires work in the timeouts backend (which should probably be extracted into a separate gem)

See #225 for continued discussion