Stream: implementers
Topic: ETags on PUT operations
Grahame Grieve (Oct 21 2019 at 20:04):
GF#25038 proposes language to clarify that an ETag is not mandatory in a response to a PUT interaction. Does anyone think that this is a problem?
Michael Lawley (Oct 23 2019 at 01:38):
Does anyone have or know of a client that expects / relies on an ETag coming back?
Grahame Grieve (Oct 23 2019 at 02:46):
I have a client that does in one context
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
