[Storage][Blob] Flatten and simplify access conditions #5672
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
jeremymeng
requested review from
HarshaNalluru,
jiacfan,
vinjiang and
XiaoningLiu
as code owners
|
I didn't replace the usage of |
jeremymeng
added
Client
jeremymeng
force-pushed
the
condition-consolidation
branch
from
95b8325 to
3382142
Compare
Use a flattened conditions type `BlobRequestConditions` instead of current
nested one. It replaces `ContainerAccessConditions` and `BlobAccessConditions`.
In addition, various conditions fields are renamed into simply `conditions`.
This makes it more convenient to pass in conditional request options.
the example
```js
{
blobAccessConditions: {
modifiedAccessConditions: {
ifMatch: uploadResponse.eTag
}
}
```
after this change becomes
```js
{
conditions: {
ifMatch: uploadResponse.eTag
}
```
jeremymeng
force-pushed
the
condition-consolidation
branch
from
3382142 to
862f930
Compare
jiacfan
reviewed
Oct 21, 2019
|
Pushed commits to resolve merge conflicts |
jeremymeng
added a commit
to jeremymeng/azure-sdk-for-js
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 21, 2019
for consistency with Blob. In PR Azure#5672 we adopted the field names `conditions` and `sourceConditions`. This change fixes the only place in File where `SourceModifiedAccessConditions` is used in public API to be consistent.
jeremymeng
added a commit
to jeremymeng/azure-sdk-for-js
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 21, 2019
for consistency with Blob. In PR Azure#5672 we adopted the field names `conditions` and `sourceConditions`. This change fixes the only place in File where `SourceModifiedAccessConditions` is used in public API to be consistent.
chradek
pushed a commit
to jeremymeng/azure-sdk-for-js
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 21, 2019
for consistency with Blob. In PR Azure#5672 we adopted the field names `conditions` and `sourceConditions`. This change fixes the only place in File where `SourceModifiedAccessConditions` is used in public API to be consistent.
ramya-rao-a
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 21, 2019
for consistency with Blob. In PR #5672 we adopted the field names `conditions` and `sourceConditions`. This change fixes the only place in File where `SourceModifiedAccessConditions` is used in public API to be consistent.
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.
Per feedback from the api review.
Use a flattened conditions type
BlobRequestConditionsinstead of currentnested one. It replaces
ContainerAccessConditionsandBlobAccessConditions.In addition, various conditions fields are renamed into simply
conditionsexcept
sourceModifiedAccessConditionswhich is renamed tosourceConditions.This makes it more convenient to pass in conditional request options.
One example:
after this change becomes
Resolves #5466