-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 157
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
Merge SocketClient component into this component #87
Conversation
…et-client * robinvdvleuten/socket-client: Make the transport method of the socket variable.
Documentation for supported PHP versions
Add main Connector facade
Update examples to use Stream v0.6 API
This causes some tests to fail due to the StreamEncryption being present in this package and the original Socket component. This will be fixed in the follow-up commit.
Updated to work around an issue in legacy HHVM < 3.8 |
README.md
Outdated
@@ -1,17 +1,28 @@ | |||
# Socket Component | |||
# react/socket |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tbh, i don't like using the lowercase composer handle as the readme title :(
My personal preference would be just Socket
. I'd even prefer the old title over react/socket
.
README.md
Outdated
@@ -1,17 +1,28 @@ | |||
# Socket Component | |||
# react/socket |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreeing with @jsor here, the old Socket Component
looks better. Some random other ideas for it:
Client and Server Socket Component
Socket Component (Client and Server)
Component providing Client and Server
Client/Server Socket Component
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just to be clear, my favorite is just Socket
😃
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Definitely
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @jsor and @WyriHaximus, I think you both made a very valid point and it doesn't make much sense to change this as part of this PR in the first place 👍
I've updated this to just "Socket" (originally "Socket Component"), because the paragraph below uses the words "server and client component"
Here's the existing situation:
This is not exactly ideal, they share quite a bit of common code and actually have a dependency on one-another for their test suite. Also, I believe this situation may be a bit confusing for consumers of this package. In particular our Datagram component provides both client and server side for datagram sockets (UDP).
This PR simply merges the existing SocketClient component into this package. This is done as-is, with only the namespace changed to
React\Socket
. This merges the existing history as to preserve original authorship (git blame etc.) into this component and only changes what necessarily has to be changed (merge conflicts existed pretty much only in meta files such as the README).If you want to review, only the last three commits are part of this merging effort, anything else is actually part of the SocketClient history (which can be verified by checking the commit hashes).
Resolves / closes #74