Re: tipidee content-encoding

From: Laurent Bercot <ska-skaware_at_skarnet.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 14:41:49 +0000

  Ah, yes, Content-Encoding...


>1. Does the CGI idea make sense for right now? Or is there an obvious flaw I'm missing?

  For now, a CGI makes sense, but you won't be exposing the file, you
will be exposing a CGI that downloads the file - it's a subtle
difference, but it means it's not quite as easy to download the file
via curl or wget or similar clients. It's a workaround, that's okay,
it's just not ideal.


>2. Does the feature sound reasonable for a future version of tipidee?

  The problem with Content-Encoding, and a few other similar headers,
is that it falls into a category I did not originally plan for when
writing tipidee: resource-specific custom headers. As in, a custom
header
that you conditionally add depending on what file you're serving. It's
doable, but it means quite a lot of rework in the way resource
attributes
are stored in the configuration database and how custom headers are
added
to the response when serving a file.

  So, yeah, it's definitely something that could, and probably should, be
added in a future version of tipidee, but not in the short term, because
it would incur pretty heavy modifications of the engine so I'm not sure
yet when I can devote the energy to it - sorry about that.

  Another approach (don't take this too seriously) is to compress *all*
the files you're serving, and add a fixed Content-Encoding custom
header,
valid for everything. 😄

--
  Laurent
Received on Wed Jan 08 2025 - 15:41:49 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed Jan 08 2025 - 15:42:20 CET