-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 393
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.
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
Less restrictive checks in MTOMDecoder #230
Conversation
What’s the content type value coming from your service? I believe we should be able to use |
I get this string: So I believe we could theoretically use application/xop+xml as a prefix |
Right, I have always seen the type and subtype first and extra attributes coming after. |
Alright, so can I make a commit with HasPrefix and merge? |
Yes |
If we were to do this better, it would be by using a more robust parser: https://pkg.go.dev/mime |
Yeah, but I believe the only 2 cases we have at the moment are |
We also have the one raised in #217 |
The one coming in the mtom header. |
I think we both had the exact same problem and solved it in the same way. The commits do the same thing. You can choose which one your prefer to merge ^^ |
Can you merge this PR into the base library? I need it in a production environment |
I added more comprehensive checks inside the |
@c4milo Can we merge this? |
Makes more MTOM-based services work correctly. Sometimes, some services do not use the exact names in their headers.