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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Response tied to originating request #86

Closed
capotej opened this issue Jan 7, 2014 · 1 comment
Closed

Response tied to originating request #86

capotej opened this issue Jan 7, 2014 · 1 comment
Milestone
1.5.1

Comments

@capotej
Copy link
Contributor

capotej commented Jan 7, 2014

Right now, responses are composed independently from the request, making it problematic to build features like CSRF or sessions. We should be using request.response to build our responses, but some refactoring is needed, as the response builder doesn't know about request.
@capotej capotej closed this as completed in 83fa4f8 Jan 9, 2014
@leifwickland
Copy link

The Finatra.info Documentation for Response links to the old Response.scala, which no longer exists as a consequence of this change. The dead link is at the end of the section in the sentence "See the Response class for more details."

I'm sorry if this isn't the best place to report that problem.

cacoco pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 13, 2015
Response is now tied to originating Request, fixes #86
4a4a4dd 
Previously, responses were generated independently of requests; This made it difficult to modify
the response out-of-band (like inside the framework on the users behalf, or in a filter). Now, you
can use `request.response` to access the response from any context in the framework or filter. See
`RequestResponseSpec` for details.

This change also renames Response to ResponseBuilder, which better describes the purpose of
this class.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
1.5.1
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@capotej @leifwickland