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.

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

Reduce ValidationHook requests #1512

Open
doddi opened this issue Dec 30, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Reduce ValidationHook requests #1512

doddi opened this issue Dec 30, 2019 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@doddi
Copy link
Contributor

doddi commented Dec 30, 2019

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
When making use of the ValidationHook configuration a module is validated against multiple times, one for each file request such as .mod, .info and .zip. Validating a module multiple times is unnecessary and could put a burden on the endpoint doing the validation.

Describe the solution you'd like
The validation endpoint is used only once per module request.

Describe alternatives you've considered
The validation endpoint provides extra information (header or body) describing the reason for the validation (info, zip, mod) and the endpoint could make the decision on whether to ignore the request.

@arschles arschles added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 21, 2020
@arschles arschles self-assigned this Feb 21, 2020
@arschles
Copy link
Member

@doddi sorry for the long delay. I don't see a reason why we shouldn't do this. I'll assign myself and send a PR as soon as I can. If you'd like to do it before me, just comment here and it's all yours 😄

Hope you have a good weekend!

@doddi
Copy link
Contributor Author

doddi commented Feb 27, 2020

@arschles How would you propose we solve it? Is it as easy as sending the validation hook only when requesting .zip? or do you think there is a better approach

@arschles
Copy link
Member

I don't see a reason why we shouldn't do this

@doddi I should have been clearer here 😆. what I mean to say is, I think we should do this as you suggested in the OP 😄

@doddi
Copy link
Contributor Author

doddi commented Feb 28, 2020

@arschles Im happy to take a look at this if you want to assign it over

@arschles arschles assigned doddi and unassigned arschles Mar 7, 2020
@arschles
Copy link
Member

arschles commented Mar 7, 2020

@doddi great, and thanks so much! I unassigned myself and moved it to you 😄

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants