chore(models): use preferred notation for JSON content-type #204
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
Ousret
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2025
Merged
Ousret
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2025
3.12.2 (2025-01-22) ------------------- **Fixed** - Parsing of special scheme that exceed 9 characters on rare custom adapters. **Changed** - Default `Content-Type` for json payloads changed from `application/json; charset="utf-8"` to `application/json;charset=utf-8`. While the previous default was valid, this is the preferred value according to RFC9110. (#204) **Misc** - Removed a useless hasattr control to support older version of urllib3-future (<2.5). - Updated our pre-commit configuration and reformatted files accordingly.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I noticed that the content-type looked like this:
"Content-Type": "application/json; charset=\"utf-8\"",and then I checked the corresponding RFC (7231) to see if that's valid.
It is valid, but not the preferred way.
Update: reference to RFC9110