4 ms·
It's not awfully promising that the article talks about "X-GitHub-Api-Version" and then calls it "X-GitHub-Version" later on... Edit: it's been fixed now, good
by garblegarble 4y ago
It's not awfully promising that the article talks about "X-GitHub-Api-Version" and then calls it "X-GitHub-Version" later on...
Edit: it's been fixed now, good Github doc fix response time!
- pkulak 4y agoI thought the days of prefacing vendor headers with "X-" were long over.
- sdiacom 4y agoEspecially if you're already prefixing it with "GitHub-". Like, you're definitely not going to step over the HTTP standard headers any time soon. That said, the overall concept is deprecated: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6648 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6648
- timrogers 4y agoAuthor here. We just wanted to be consistent here with other GitHub-specific headers prefixed this way. We could have had different headers with different formats or tried to change the formats of the old headers, but we figured this was the sanest way.
- leipert 4y agoHow would you do that breaking change then? (slightly in jest ;))
- Gigachad 4y agoThe reason for that was eventually these headers became real standards and software would break when the X was removed. I very much doubt we will ever see github api headers added in to nginx and apache. So if your header is something you think should/will be standard but it's still in beta/testing, give it the real name.
- timrogers 4y agoAuthor here! Thank you so much for flagging this - it’s amazing what can sneak through so many proof reading attempts. We’ll get this fixed.
- Too 4y agoThis should be argument enough that /v2 is a lot less susceptible to such error. Please also return error if the wrong key was used, instead of silent fallback of assuming no version.