Replaced originalRequest on filters with new HttpMessageInfo object #243
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jekh
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 25, 2015
Replaced originalRequest on filters with new HttpMessageInfo object
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR replaces the originalRequest parameter on the RequestFilter and ResponseFilter with a new object, HttpMessageInfo. The new object provides access to the originalRequest, as well as an isHttps() method, the full URL (of the original request), and the client's ChannelHandlerContext.
The main motivator for this change was a recognition that we will want to expose additional data to the filters in the future. If we add them as interface parameters, the interface will become unmanageable, and every change will break all existing code. By placing these additional message parameters into an object, we can continue to add fields over time without breaking existing code.
Major thanks to @NozomiIto for bringing this issue to light in issue #238!