RFC-5313: Remove Metakey #5313
Merged
RFC-5313: Remove Metakey #5313
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
Signed-off-by: Xuanwo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Xuanwo <[email protected]>
3 tasks
koushiro
reviewed
Nov 13, 2024
koushiro
reviewed
Nov 13, 2024
koushiro
reviewed
Nov 13, 2024
koushiro
reviewed
Nov 13, 2024
koushiro
reviewed
Nov 13, 2024
koushiro
reviewed
Nov 13, 2024
Co-authored-by: Qinxuan Chen <[email protected]>
All suggestions have been applied. Please review again, thanks! |
koushiro
approved these changes
Nov 13, 2024
meteorgan
reviewed
Nov 29, 2024
| let entries = op.list("path").await?; | ||
| for entry in entries { | ||
| let mut meta = entry.metadata(); | ||
| if !op.metadata_capability().etag { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Based on this usage, it seems to be the metadata capability of the list operation ?
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Which issue does this PR close?
Result of #5287
Rationale for this change
New RFC.
What changes are included in this PR?
Are there any user-facing changes?
Not yet.