Switch from reqwest to bitreq#737
Conversation
|
I've assigned @tnull as a reviewer! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This needs a formatter run, otherwise generally LGTM.
Should be okay for RGS/scorer downloads, but for other applications (syncing, mostly) I think we want to wait switching over until bitreq is properly async and they have a way to reuse a single connection instead of reopening one per request (see rust-bitcoin/corepc#441 and rust-bitcoin/corepc#442).
oof, that's pretty bad.
mmm, yea, pipelining isn't too hard to add... |
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2025-12-bitreq
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f92b530 to
ad3b854
Compare
|
Okay, cleaned up, rebased, and added a max body size. We'll want rust-bitcoin/corepc#463 too but I don't think this strictly needs to wait on it. |
`reqwest` is one of the largest contributors of code size and dependencies (including single-author dependencies) to much of the rust-bitcoin ecosystem, including ldk-node. Thus, Tobin took the time to (ask an LLM to) fork `minreq` and add async support to it, including async `rustls` support. As its now a functional HTTP(s) client, its time for the ecosystem to start switching over. Luckily, its ~trivial to do.
TheBlueMatt
force-pushed
the
2025-12-bitreq
branch
from
ad3b854 to
7bb147f
Compare
3 participants
reqwestis one of the largest contributors of code size and dependencies (including single-author dependencies) to much of the rust-bitcoin ecosystem, including ldk-node.Thus, Tobin took the time to (ask an LLM to) fork
minreqand add async support to it, including asyncrustlssupport. As its now a functional HTTP(s) client, its time for the ecosystem to start switching over. Luckily, its ~trivial to do.