Skip to content

Conversation

@marcuslinke
Copy link
Contributor

@marcuslinke marcuslinke commented Oct 13, 2016

@KostyaSha For review.


This change is Reviewable

/**
* Configure connection timeout in milliseconds
*/
public NettyDockerCmdExecFactory withConnectTimeout(Integer connectTimeout) {
Copy link
Member

@KostyaSha KostyaSha Oct 13, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Jersey has com.github.dockerjava.jaxrs.JerseyDockerCmdExecFactory#withConnectTimeout(Integer connectTimeout) so move method to DockerCmdExecFactory ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure if we should do that. Consider a new DockerCmdExecFactory implementation where this can't be configured...

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this option is must have for any remote connection and we can remove it any time later.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Additionally I don't see any advantage to do so. A user is working against a concrete implementation for sure and internally we don't need this option. All these options (connect timeout, read timeout...) were moved from DockerConfig to concrete DockerCmdExecFactory implementation sometimes ago as these are highly implementation specific options.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because netty impl is buggy i keep NETTY/JERSEY choose. Connect timeout seems reasonable for any impl. But i can configure it in conditionals on my side of course.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As its not usual to support multiple implementations I think its OK to do so in your case.

@marcuslinke marcuslinke merged commit 75e9a2c into docker-java:master Oct 27, 2016
Yogu pushed a commit to Yogu/docker-java that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2016
panuse pushed a commit to TuKangTech/docker-java that referenced this pull request Aug 20, 2017
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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants