On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Jeff Ortel jortel@redhat.com wrote:

Hey Waldemar,

Thanks for you kind comments about suds and for your suggestions.

--8<---

...

I have even written my own SOAP client library so I can talk them. It is inspired by your API but it is based on lxml[1] for all the XML wrangling and httplib2[2] for all the request/response/authentication/cookies stuff.

Very cool.

As for lxml, Suds started with lxml and ran into limitations. It's a good lib but lacks tools for dealing with namespaces. Specifically, it's lack of support for prefixes. Given the lack of alternatives, I decided to just write what I needed and be done with it. After all, it was only about a 2 day job.

Yes, I know what you are talking about. The prefixes needed special handling but then again I knew that I am not capable of writing XML parsing library so I stuck with lxml. I found lxml.objectify especially useful for handling the results of SOAP calls.

--8<---

...

What do you think about switching the transport to httplib2? It is an extra dependency but it makes http handling easier. Or maybe one could come up with a simple interface and make the transport pluggable?

Yes, I think making the transport pluggable is a good solution. It could ship with a default transport based on urllib2 as is and users can then switch it out for anything they choose without introducing dependencies on the core.

Yes that sounds as a good plan. If you designated a place where contributions can go (wiki?) I could upload what I have got as a recipe. I will tweak it as needed to fit into the plugin architecture. Now the only thing left is to come up with one :-).

Waldemar