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

[core-http] Should we still use RequestPolicyOptions? #7048

Closed
jeremymeng opened this issue Jan 21, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed

[core-http] Should we still use RequestPolicyOptions? #7048

jeremymeng opened this issue Jan 21, 2020 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
Azure.Core Client This issue points to a problem in the data-plane of the library.
Milestone

Comments

@jeremymeng
Copy link
Member

Currently it only contains one private property:

_logger: HttpPipelineLogger

the constructor of RequstPolicy takes in RequestPolicyOptions. However, none of our core-http built-in request policy factory methods are passing in an option for the logger. It is not possible to pass in a logger in current Storage request policy factories either.

Also HttpPipelineLogger is not directly compatible with our core-logger.

So should we remove it (breaking change) and consider using core logger if possible?

@jeremymeng jeremymeng added Azure.Core Client This issue points to a problem in the data-plane of the library. labels Jan 21, 2020
@ramya-rao-a ramya-rao-a added this to the [2020] February milestone Jan 22, 2020
@xirzec xirzec modified the milestones: [2020] February, [2020] March Feb 11, 2020
@xirzec xirzec modified the milestones: [2020] March, Backlog Mar 9, 2020
@xirzec xirzec modified the milestones: Backlog, [2020] July Jun 18, 2020
@xirzec
Copy link
Member

xirzec commented Jun 18, 2020

Done as part of #9468

@xirzec xirzec closed this as completed Jun 18, 2020
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 12, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Azure.Core Client This issue points to a problem in the data-plane of the library.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants