Storage clients shouldn't be required to provide a response decoder factory

Created on 23 December 2019, almost 5 years ago
Updated 30 October 2023, about 1 year ago

Storage clients shouldn't be required to provide a response decoder factory, since they might handle response decoding completely on their own, without relying on the response decoders provided in the module. In addition, nothing in the base class actually depends on there being a response decoder.

Originally reported by GuyPaddock @ #3077088: Remove unused getName() method in ExternalEntityStorageClientBase

Feature request
Status

Active

Version

2.0

Component

Code

Created by

🇧🇪Belgium rp7

Live updates comments and jobs are added and updated live.
Sign in to follow issues

Comments & Activities

Not all content is available!

It's likely this issue predates Contrib.social: some issue and comment data are missing.

  • 🇳🇱Netherlands pgrond

    I agree that the specific storage client should be responsible for how to decode the repsonse. So I'm in favour of moving it out of the base class and move it to the specific implementation.

  • 🇫🇷France guignonv

    I support that as well and as the developer of other external entity storage that are not using a response decoder factory, I had to include that without using it in my modules, which doesn't make sense. I'll update my modules without problem once the change is made to External entities module.

Production build 0.71.5 2024