PATCH: KProtocolInfo's use of KProtocolManager::slaveProtocol

[Waldo Bastian]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sunday 18 July 2004 23:09, Dawit A. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The following patch makes it an explicit requirement for a protocol
> to declare that its support for proxying relies on another protocol.
> This way the majority of protocols that do not support proxying get
> penalized when any of the static KProtocolInfo:: functions are
> invoked.

That makes sense, but does it really make a difference in practice?
Because the scheduler will call slaveProtocol() anyway.

Maybe instead of a boolean we should use a list of protocols that can proxy 
this protocol. An empty list means no proxy support and we can then skip the 
proxy test in slaveProtocol completely. Only if the list contains 2 or more 
entries, or one entry that points to another protocol we need to check which 
protocol to use.

I guess that would mean that http,https,webdav,webdavs and ftp should all list 
http and https as possible proxy protocols. Something like:
	ProxiedBy=http,https
Are their other protocols that have the ability to use a proxy?

> This is specially true if you use automatic proxy detection, but do not
> have it setup. There is a noticable delay that can be preceived as
> a system "freeze-up".

Cheers,
Waldo
- -- 
bastian at kde.org  |   KDE Community World Summit 2004  |  bastian at suse.com
bastian at kde.org  | 21-29 August, Ludwigsburg, Germany |  bastian at suse.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA+5+2N4pvrENfboIRAm8EAJsH55VDWSsSYpRtZhO5Ys1uz4oHHACeOGIS
dETK+KZnWx9X6Hoi517I2Ss=
=SEpb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----