Open
Conversation
|
LGTM; please address conflicts for a final review. |
|
LGTM, someone else must approve/merge. |
ghost
changed the title
Contributor
|
Thanks for the heads up @garyburd, @IngCr3at1on sorry for the late reply on this PR. Would you be willing to update the PR with Gary's concerns in mind? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #480 #404
Summary of Changes
1.Add the method NegotiateSubprotocol func (r * http.Request) (string, error) in the upgrade, the user can customize the negotiation sub-protocol.
2. NegotiateSubprotocol has higher priority than Subprotocols.
3.The responseHeader does not support negotiated sub-protocol (Sec-WebSocket-Protocol),If necessary, please use Upgrader.NegotiateSubprotocol and Upgrader.Subprotocols,use the method to view the Upgrader struct.