Align Set-Cookie attribute names with RFC6265 syntax #2995
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
This changeset aligns the "Set-Cookie" propertie names with the RFC6265 in the sense that according to syntax (see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis#section-4.1.1) all the names must uppercase the first character. Most browsers are lax in how they interpret the cookies so the old behavior should not cause any issues, but its better to align with the spec.
bryce-anderson
approved these changes
Jul 3, 2024
idelpivnitskiy
approved these changes
Jul 3, 2024
servicetalk-http-api/src/main/java/io/servicetalk/http/api/DefaultHttpSetCookie.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
daschl
changed the title
daschl
changed the title
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 changeset aligns the "Set-Cookie" property names with the RFC6265 in the sense that according to the spec (see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis#section-4.1.1) where property names are using camel-case syntax instead of all lower case.
NOTE: The name of an attribute-value pair is not case sensitive. So while they are presented here in CamelCase, such as "HttpOnly" or "SameSite", any case is accepted. E.x.: "httponly", "Httponly", "hTTPoNLY", etc.
This means that this change is purely cosmetic and helps with consistency with other implementations, i.e. Netty.