Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Switch unixfs.Metadata.MimeType to optional #3458

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 2, 2016
Merged

Switch unixfs.Metadata.MimeType to optional #3458

merged 2 commits into from
Dec 2, 2016

Conversation

mib-kd743naq
Copy link
Contributor

*** THIS IS A BREAKING CHANGE *** as per the google documentation: "Required is forever"

Nevertheless this seems like a good idea at this time: there are no known
producers ( nor consumers ) of MetaData nodes, and the current requirement
of MimeType has an extremely narrow application scope.

This change could very well be rejected in lieu of implementing a new type
of node ( e.g. TheRealMetadata ) in the DataType enum.

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mib Kd743naq <mib.kd743naq@gmail.com>
*** THIS IS A BREAKING CHANGE *** as per [1]: "Required is forever"

Nevertheless this seems like a good idea at this time: there are no known
producers ( nor consumers ) of MetaData nodes, and the current requirement
of MimeType has an extremely narrow application scope.

This change could very well be rejected in lieu of implementing a new type
of node ( e.g. TheRealMetadata ) in the DataType enum.

Based on #3451 (comment)

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mib Kd743naq <mib.kd743naq@gmail.com>

[1] https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto#specifying-field-rules
@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Dec 2, 2016

I'm in favor of this. required was a mistake in protobuf. using it was our mistake.

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

LGTM, thanks @mib-kd743naq

@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping merged commit ac16ac5 into ipfs:master Dec 2, 2016
@Kubuxu
Copy link
Member

Kubuxu commented Dec 2, 2016

Are you sure that this won't break protobuf reading in older builds?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants