Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
Why do you think we should change this? Just for consistency? I suspect that,
if we
really want to be consistent in the http layer, we should only decode in client.
Original comment by djc.ochtman
on 10 Feb 2010 at 3:11
Sidetracked by work for a while ... here's the test for it.
Original comment by matt.goo...@gmail.com
on 10 Feb 2010 at 4:12
Attachments:
Attachments mean nothing to couchdb - they're just blobs of data with a content
type - so
they should be passed straight through to the application to handle.
It's not about consistency. Imagine some dumb proxy-style application that's
blindly
grabbing attachments from CouchDB and sending them on somewhere else in a
typical while ...
read ... write loop. If it comes across an attachment that just happens to be
'attachment/json' then it will break.
Yes, I think the decoding should only happen in the client module, i.e. where
the meaning of
the data is understood. (We could pass an option through to request() to make
things easy
but that seems a bit dirty.)
Original comment by matt.goo...@gmail.com
on 10 Feb 2010 at 4:24
Fixed in r14e447ce4e.
Original comment by matt.goo...@gmail.com
on 20 Feb 2010 at 6:49
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
matt.goo...@gmail.com
on 10 Feb 2010 at 3:00