Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Custom HTTP Client for HTTP Executor #174

Closed
Wondertan opened this issue Aug 25, 2019 · 4 comments · Fixed by #175
Closed

Custom HTTP Client for HTTP Executor #174

Wondertan opened this issue Aug 25, 2019 · 4 comments · Fixed by #175

Comments

@Wondertan
Copy link
Member

Why custom HTTP client is not an option for HTTP Executor?

I would like to use custom client based on https://github.com/libp2p/go-libp2p-http. The aim is to make similar to IPFS API, but with key difference - API user must initiate it with own key and be an almost full featured Host. The idea is to make nodes with commands which could be executed by other network members with some restrictions.

@Stebalien
Copy link
Member

If you'd just like to puppet go-ipfs remotely, I recommend using https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-http-client or https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-api (which allow specifying a client). The former library is the replacement for the latter but doesn't yet provide any API stability guarantees.

But you're right, this library should accept a custom HTTP client. I'll file a PR.

@Stebalien
Copy link
Member

Could you give #175 a review?

@Wondertan
Copy link
Member Author

Wondertan commented Aug 27, 2019

I recommend using https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-http-client or https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-api

For sure, but I want also use CLI with custom client for node interactions

@Wondertan
Copy link
Member Author

Could you give #175 a review?

Sure. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants