You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After working on some rest handlers for PATCH requests, I noticed that only PUT requests go through the is_conflict function and as such can return a 409.
I wasn't sure about this but, apparently, the rfc
do mention 409 and 412 as possible return codes in case of conflict.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Some conflicts will happen when you do the actual modification and it's up to you to return a 409 in that case, but I agree that some conflicts may be detected in is_conflict the same way as for PUT and we should probably allow it.
I would like to do this soon but I'm conflicted on whether this should be a 2.x change or a 3.0 change, since it'll change drastically how cowboy_rest executes when doing PATCH requests compared to the current code and documentation. But the RFC says the code and documentation is wrong, so maybe it should be treated as a bug. I dunno.
After working on some rest handlers for PATCH requests, I noticed that only PUT requests go through the is_conflict function and as such can return a 409.
I wasn't sure about this but, apparently, the rfc
do mention 409 and 412 as possible return codes in case of conflict.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: