Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactor soap client #107

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 9, 2018
Merged

Conversation

anjmao
Copy link
Collaborator

@anjmao anjmao commented Oct 8, 2018

}

type PingRequest struct {
// XMLName xml.Name `xml:"http://example.com/service.xsd PingRequest"`
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There are some problems with xml unmarshaling. If I uncomment the following XMLName I get error:

xml: name "request" in tag of soap.Ping.Request conflicts with name "PingRequest" in *soap.PingRequest.XMLName

@c4milo Do you know what problem can it be? To me it looks like a xml package problem with namespaces.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it similar to this issue? #17 If so, yes.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok, I see, it sound similar. Thanks 👍

Copy link
Member

@c4milo c4milo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, feel free to create a tag before merging this PR so that people can still use the old API. The XML namespacing issue can be done in another PR. Thanks!

@anjmao anjmao merged commit 193c95a into hooklift:master Oct 9, 2018
@anjmao anjmao deleted the refactor-soap-client branch October 9, 2018 07:45
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.

Suggestions for more idiomatic code
2 participants