(fiddler4) Unlist due to Telerik request

[ferventcoder]

Telerik reached out and is asking that the Fiddler package be removed as it is giving direct access to a download location they no longer show on the site. Since they have an information gateway to receive information prior to download, they have asked that we remove the package so that folks obtain the downloads directly from them.

This is not up for discussion, please keep comments respectful.

[gep13]

@ferventcoder I have removed the fiddler4 package from the AU processing, so new versions shouldn't be pushed to chocolatey.org 😢

[majkinetor]

We could still produce the package on this repository internally and make it available in releases, without making any problem with Telerik request, as it will never get pushed to the gallery.

What do you think ?

[majkinetor]

It could even be considered to get embedded so that their endpoint doesn't get involved.

It could also live on another git repository.

[gep13]

@majkinetor given the request that was received, I think it would be best to leave this package as is (i.e. preserved in the unlisted folder), and do nothing else with it.

[majkinetor]

@gep13 Sure.

I was just thinking generally about this problem. Maybe we could make a document about what users who want to depend on unlisted packages do.

I don't use fiddler so I couldn't care less, but, I could, for example, move a package to my AU repository which isn't associated to Chocolatey as a company, and make embedded package there that is not published on gallery but in git releases. This can't be distinguished from users who cached the package in the Nexus/Artifactory as unlisting doesn't affect them, and its way better since only AU uses the vendor link and generally only once.

Just something to think about.

[ferventcoder]

Please remove references to the download url - that includes from this repository.

[ferventcoder]

@majkinetor thanks.

[gep13]

@majkinetor 👍

[russcam]

Do you have any recommendations for another proxy that can be configured for automated integration tests?

[gep13]

@russcam sorry, not sure i follow your question? Can you elaborate?

[russcam]

Sure. I was using this package for integration tests, to verify that a Windows Installer is using the proxy specified by input parameters to the installer. With Fiddler, I could set up a custom rule to capture the request traffic and assert that it contains a request known to come from the installer.

I could check the fiddler executable into source (license permitting) but would prefer to install and configure one through chocolatey because it's part of a vagrant provisioning step. So I'm wondering if there is another proxy chocolatey package that you could recommend for this?

[majkinetor]

You can try https://github.com/mitmproxy/mitmproxy

If it works for you, I can create a choco package.

[gep13]

@russcam ah, I see what you mean now 😄

In addition to the above, you might want to give this a try: https://chocolatey.org/packages/Charles

[brunoyb]

@majkinetor Hey, this mitmproxy tool seems to be a good alternative to both Fiddler and Charles. I would like to try it! Can you please create a package for us? I can also create one if you don't want to maintain it yourself or here. Thank you!

[majkinetor]

I added the issue in my repository: majkinetor/au-packages#68
I am not sure when tho.

[ferventcoder]

March 2017ish may have been the change over to collecting info - #632