Resteasy Reactive Client with multipart forms

[andlinger]

Description

We use the Resteasy Rest Client with Multipart Forms. We would like to switch to Resteasy Reactive with the whole project. However, in our POJO form we use a multipart annotation for which there is no counterpart in Resteasy Reactive.

It would be great if the @PartFilename annotation could be implemented.

public class OurForm {
  @FormParam("files")
  @PartFilename("document.txt")
  @PartType(MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN)
  private String documentFile;
}

Implementation ideas

No response

[quarkus-bot]

/cc @FroMage, @geoand, @stuartwdouglas

[geoand]

This is one for @michalszynkiewicz

Just to be clear, you are asking for @PartFilename on the server side? The idea being I assume that you control the saved file name?

[andlinger]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by server side.

I have following rest client in my Quarkus backend:

@Path("/convert")
@RegisterRestClient
public interface Client {

    @POST
    @Consumes(MediaType.MULTIPART_FORM_DATA)
    @Produces("application/pdf")
    byte[] convert(@MultipartForm OurForm form) throws PdfGenerationException;
}

This client is used in our Quarkus backend to send a text file, which we have in our OurForm object, to another server and have this text file converted to a PDF.

[geoand]

Okay, so understood this wrong.

@michalszynkiewicz this is for you after all

[michalszynkiewicz]

I added this to my todo list but I won't have time for it soon so I'm leaving it unassigned.

[geoand]

I'll take it as it seems like something we want for 2.7

[andlinger]

@geoand Are you sure this works like the non-reactive rest client? I just changed the dependencies to the Reactive Rest Client on Quarkus 2.7.0.CR1 and now it doesn't work anymore. The server, which is contacted with the REST client, no longer recognizes the transferred data.

Update:
The @PartFilename annotation only works when the annotated member is a java.io.File object. In the past this also worked if the member was of type String.

[geoand]

Right, we should probably only allow it on File, which is semantically more correct. WDYT @michalszynkiewicz ?

[andlinger]

But in the JAX-RS client it also works with String and Buffer. Shouldn't it be the same in both implementations?

[geoand]

There is always a case to be made whether we should be perfectly compatible vs doing something that more semantically correct.

When it involves non-core features, I tend to prefer the latter. But in this case, it's ultimately up to @michalszynkiewicz

[andlinger]

Is there a decision on this?