-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 702
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
Extensible client options #1263
Conversation
…lient. Introduces the builder pattern for these common configuration options so that it is extensible in the future.
62e32a4
to
1678fef
Compare
Should this class use Auto-Value? |
We certainly could. We're not using autovalue yet for any of the other builders (or at all). It might make sense to come back with a refactoring PR to convert the all builders to use autovalue (if it's even possible). Otherwise, we will have a mix of several manually defined builders and one autovalue builder. WDYT? |
I'm not sold on trying to shoehorn autovalue in here. If we were starting from scratch, it would make a lot of sense. We cannot switch many of these implementations over to autovalue as they already have public constructors (including the |
Introduces the builder pattern for these common configuration options so that it is extensible in the future.
Add ability to configure
requestReason
anduserAgent
.