Some edits (Python 2.6 compat., no websocket by default, some debugging)

[Elektordi]

No description provided.

[OliverF]

Great, thanks for this. I'll have a quick look now and do a quick test over the weekend.

[Elektordi]

Hello! Did you had any time to review this?

[Silex]

I think "Prevent exception on quit" 986760e is the wrong fix.

IMHO 70501e9 from #13 is the right one.

The other commits looks fine tho, I'd just drop the last one.

[Elektordi]

This seems to be different problems. In 986760e, I'm fixing a bug I think I added in previous commit:
Since you can disable the sockets, there will be exception if at the end you try to close a socket that was disabled on startup.

[Silex]

Well, ok for the requestHandler variable, but for the broadcast variable it is a mistake because it is always present. Also your fix does not take care of the quitsock. The diff should be like this:

diff --git a/relay.py b/relay.py
index e2285b3..3014132 100644
--- a/relay.py
+++ b/relay.py
@@ -24,8 +24,10 @@
 # Close threads gracefully
 #
 def quit():
	broadcast.kill = True
-	requestHandler.kill = True

- 	quitsock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
- 	quitsock.connect(("127.0.0.1", options.port))
- 	quitsock.close()
+	if requestHandler:
+		requestHandler.kill = True
+  		quitsock = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
+ 	 	quitsock.connect(("127.0.0.1", options.port))
+ 	 	quitsock.close()
 	sys.exit(1)
@@ -54,6 +56,9 @@ def quit():
 		logging.error("Port must be numeric")
 		op.print_help()
 		sys.exit(1)
+		
+	requestHandler = None
 
 	Status()
 	statusThread = threading.Thread(target=Status._instance.run)

Then my commit fixes the broadcast --> broadcaster typo.

[Silex]

To be honest the whole quit() code is dubious.

Instead of all these foo.kill = True, it'd be code like requestHandler.acceptsock.close(), possibly wrapped in some requestHandler.shutdown() method.

[Silex]

Here is what I have in mind as a refactoring of the shutdown process: Silex@217904d

[OliverF]

Sorry @Elektordi, I haven't forgotten about this, I've just been very busy lately!

@Silex good catch regarding quitsock. I think you're right, the whole quit process needs re-thinking. Perhaps we could open a new PR for your proposed changes and discuss there?

[Silex]

A'ight 👍