[Pidgin] #4459: libpurple should use libproxy

[Pidgin]

#4459: libpurple should use libproxy
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  kipple           |        Owner:           
     Type:  enhancement      |       Status:  new      
Milestone:  Patches welcome  |    Component:  libpurple
  Version:  2.3.1            |   Resolution:           
 Keywords:                   |  
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------

Comment(by datallah):

 Replying to [comment:7 felipec]:
 > Replying to [comment:6 datallah]:
 > > That said, it actually isn't clear whether or not libproxy is even
 reasonable to use with something like Pidgin that does direct TCP/IP
 communication of arbitrary protocols - the API which does the proxy lookup
 requires a '''URL''' that you're connecting to.  What would that be for
 our cases that aren't http connections?  Would "xmpp://talk.google.com" be
 reasonably expected to work?
 >
 > Of course that would work, how do you think people use libproxy?

 Why "of course"?  "Of course" theoretically it could work, but I would
 imagine that most networks that use a PAC file wouldn't work right with
 such a URL (the one that I have access to doesn't).  There also aren't
 necessarily standard schemes for every network connection that we make -
 what scheme would you use for e.g. a direct file transfer connection?

 A correctly written PAC file probably should work for unrecognized
 schemes, but my gut says there will be lots of support requests from
 people whose stuff suddenly breaks.

 All of the examples listed on the libproxy wiki of people using it are
 http or http-like stuff based as far as I can tell.

 None of this is to say that using libproxy isn't a good idea, but it
 requires investigation of things of this nature.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/4459#comment:8>
Pidgin <http://pidgin.im>
Pidgin