Re: Asynchronous DNS

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 18:49:43 +1100
> 
> I kinda think we've gotten as far as we're going to get in this
> discussion, and that it's time to merge.

I'm sorry, but I disagree.  I think the APIs that expect a fully
functional process object should wait for the DNS resolution to
complete, before they do anything.

> There should be no impact on any existing use.  It should be 100%
> backward compatible.

But it isn't, as was demonstrated by ERC.  And it cannot be 100%
backward compatible, unless the above-mentioned waiting is added to
the affected APIs.

> If there are no bugs to be found in the refactored code, I will then
> proceed to alter the TLS negotiation code to make it, too, fully
> asynchronous (i.e., absolutely no user-visible hangs when calling things
> like `(url-retrieve "https://very-slow-site.com/";)').

As I made it clear in the related discussion in bug#22493, I'm opposed
to that change, in the way it is proposed, FWIW.