Support date properties in Content-Disposition HTTP header #1443
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As discussed with @rstoyanchev, before merging this PR we should choose a strategy regarding to date/time that we previously exposed with
longlike inlong HttpHeaders.getAccessControlMaxAge().Should we continue to use
longfor consistency?Should we add
Instantbased variants and deprecatelongbased ones?Pros and cons should be discussed and the solution should be applied globally to Spring Framework API like we did for
Optional.cc @jhoeller
Issue: SPR-15555