[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-600?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17880899#comment-17880899
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on MRESOLVER-600:
------------------------------------------
michael-o commented on code in PR #576:
URL: https://github.com/apache/maven-resolver/pull/576#discussion_r1753623409
##########
maven-resolver-spi/src/main/java/org/eclipse/aether/spi/connector/transport/http/RFC9457/RFC9457Reporter.java:
##########
@@ -20,60 +20,65 @@
import java.io.IOException;
+import com.google.gson.Gson;
+import com.google.gson.JsonSyntaxException;
+
/**
- * A reporter for RFC9457 messages.
+ * A reporter for RFC 9457 messages.
* RFC9457 is a standard for reporting problems in HTTP responses as a JSON
object.
* There are members specified in the RFC but none of those appear to be
required,
* @see <a href=https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9457#section-3-7>rfc9457
section 3.7</a>
* Given the JSON fields are not mandatory, this reporter simply extracts the
body of the
* response without validation.
- * A RFC9457 message is detected by the content type
"application/problem+json".
+ * A RFC 9457 message is detected by the content type
"application/problem+json".
*
* @param <T> The type of the response.
* @param <E> The base exception type to throw if the response is not a
RFC9457 message.
*/
-public abstract class Rfc9457Reporter<T, E extends Exception> {
- protected abstract boolean isRfc9457Message(T response);
+public abstract class RFC9457Reporter<T, E extends Exception> {
+ private static final Gson GSON = new Gson();
Review Comment:
I am OK with GSON as long as it does not leak into other components
(plugins) and causes classpath issues.
> Implement RFC 9457
> ------------------
>
> Key: MRESOLVER-600
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-600
> Project: Maven Resolver
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Resolver
> Reporter: Mark Dodgson
> Priority: Minor
>
> HTTP1.1 [RFC
> 9112|https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9112.html#name-status-line] section 4
> defines the response status code to optionally include a text description
> (human readable) of the reason for the status code.
> There is an additional [RFC9457|https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9457] which
> makes use of the body to inform of a reason for the error response allowing
> for easier investigation.
> h2. Why is this important
> [RFC9113|https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9113] is the HTTP2 protocol
> standard and the response status only considers the [status
> code|https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9113#name-response-pseudo-header-fiel]
> and not the reason phrase, as such important information can be lost in
> helping the client determine a route cause of a failure.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
