[erlang-questions] can't make this shit up
Mon Dec 12 09:42:05 CET 2011
Well that code is quite old, I wrote it several years ago when I was
trying to implement the https through a proxy feature but back then
the ssl application did not have the upgrade capability. I commented
it out as I expected to be able to uncomment it once the ssl
application was fixed.
I would be very suprised if it worked with out some adjustments, and I
am not sure it is compleat. And to make a long story short the ssl
application had many problems and I spent the last couple of years
making a better ssl application.
Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
2011/12/10, Tim Watson <>:
> Hi Ingela,
> When it is a high enough priority for me, I'll write a patch if it's not
> already happened. Strangely the code appears to be already there but
> commented out in httpc_handler.erl, but I haven't the time to dig through
> what it does. Maybe I'll uncomment it, recompile and see if it works when
> I'm in work on Monday. :)
> On 9 December 2011 11:15, Ingela Andin <> wrote:
>> It is on the todo list for httpc. It is only a question of priorities.
>> If sombody would like
>> it faster than we can manage to get it on the top of our priority-list
>> feel free to contribute.
>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>> 2011/12/9, Tim Watson <>:
>> > On 9 December 2011 10:56, Max Bourinov <> wrote:
>> >> Hi Joel,
>> >> The same story we have some while ago. httpc does it's job very well
>> and I
>> >> don't see a reason to use ibrowse after all.
>> > The one thing that httpc doesn't do is allow https traffic through a
>> > This means that you can't, for example, use it to access github behind a
>> > corporate firewall. If this was fixed, I'd revert back to httpc. Given
>> > ibrowse *does* allow this, I can't imagine that it's impossible to make
>> > work in httpc.
More information about the erlang-questions