v5 support

[VetSoftKeith]

With Twitch releasing their v5 API last week, are you planning on doing an update to accommodate v5 once the docs are released?

[BobbySig]

@keesh7663 I'm considering doing the upgrade myself, but my issue is that there are some pretty major changes on the develop branch that I don't know the status of. @urgrue can anything be done with those changes or should I just ignore them and build off of the current master branch?

[Ollee]

Has anyone heard anything from urgrue? @BobbySig ?

[BobbySig]

I haven't heard anything from @urgrue

[Gikkman]

I looked through the changes in the development branch, at it mostly looks like refactoring and preparations to move over to another Http library. Hence, I don't think they are to big of a loss to ditch in case someone wants to extend this library.

[VetSoftKeith]

I've started the upgrade to @urgue wrapper code... I should have a solid foundation and a repo coming somewhat soon

[BobbySig]

@Gikkman true, though making the swap to the new Async Http Client (the successor to the project @urgrue was switching to) wouldn't be a bad idea, as that project is under active development and seems to work very well.

@keesh7663 awesome!

[urgrue]

Hey everyone, sorry for my silence! I do intend to update the library for v5 support, but won't have any time until mid- next month. I'll gladly accept pull requests if someone beats me to it.

Regarding the develop branch: As you all noticed I had started refactoring to move to a more robust and tested http client library. My ultimate goal is to provide an interface that this library will use, provide a default implementation, and also allow one to implement that same interface with any http library of your choosing. This way if your project is already using a different http library, you aren't forced into taking on the extra dependency of the additional http library.

[Gikkman]

Yeah, that move sounds like a good idea @urgrue Nice to see you back, though I hope you didn't return because you felt forced too.

Will you keep on working with this, @keesh7663, or do you intend to wait and let urgrue have a go at it first? What would you prefer urgue?

[VetSoftKeith]

well, it's been slow going on my end due to other commitments, but if @urgrue has it under control then I can stop the work on it... i probably wouldn't have a final working copy of it until about the same sort of time-frame

[VetSoftKeith]

Just wanted to update here: I've got all the endpoints that currently exist in the v3 version of the wrapper done. I just need to add the 2 new endpoints (which I will be working on over the next few days). Another thing I am looking at doing is switching it over to using the Apache Http Client at some point.

@Gikkman @urgrue @BobbySig

[Gikkman]

That's great to hear.

I also agree that it might be a good idea to switch to a more stock Http library. The ideal solution would probably be to somehow make it modular (e.g. users can chose which Http client they want to use). At the same time, in order to keep the library accessible, it is probably better to bundle a Http library with it.

Again, great to hear that you are making steady progress.

[VetSoftKeith]

@Gikkman if you want to help test it out, you can find it here

[Gikkman]

Sure, I'll take a look

[VetSoftKeith]

@urgue so I haven't been able to finish the rewrite. RL kinda got in the way of that