Conversation
8b81fe3 to
baa25c4
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added these [SRV-XYZ] "label comments" because there are 15 different return cases in the match-and-stream (without counting the serve vs stream variations), and if you wanna think about it, or take notes about this flow, it's a bit hard. Of course AI helps a lot, but still, naming things help us humans understand and manipulate them.
I'm fine with removing if this feels too personal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does SRV even stand for? Serve? The problem with acronyms is that no one ever knows what they mean. I would just choose a simple 1-2 word title to label the comments if that will be helpful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, serve hehe I kinda find this helpful to myself, but I can see it might just cause confusion to anyone else. I'll drop it.
…fied-Since Co-authored-by: GPT-Luna Co-authored-by: Gerrod Ubben <gerrod3@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Carlos Feria <2582866+carlosthe19916@users.noreply.github.com> Closes: pulp#7929
baa25c4 to
f612106
Compare
gerrod3
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks good! Thanks!
| """A client whose copy predates the file downloads the whole thing again.""" | ||
| url = urljoin(distribution_url, "1.iso") | ||
|
|
||
| # "I last saw this at the dawn of time" -> the file is newer -> send it all. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The dawn of time, aka January 1st, 1970. 😆
|
Two follow-ups on the caching headers — one correctness/security, one a config request — plus a note on documentation. 1. Object-storage redirects should be A presigned URL is a bearer capability — anyone holding it can fetch the object directly from the store, bypassing the content guard. The fix is to make the redirect path emit 2. Make the 3. Please add user documentation for the feature.
Disclosure: Claude was used to help draft this comment. |
Closes: #7929
📜 Checklist
See: Pull Request Walkthrough