Skip to content

Add support for the RFC 10008 - #34

Open
sl1depengwyn wants to merge 1 commit into
Vlix:masterfrom
sl1depengwyn:mf/rfc-10008-query
Open

Add support for the RFC 10008#34
sl1depengwyn wants to merge 1 commit into
Vlix:masterfrom
sl1depengwyn:mf/rfc-10008-query

Conversation

@sl1depengwyn

@sl1depengwyn sl1depengwyn commented Jul 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Related to haskell-servant/servant#1900

Summary

  • Add the QUERY method as methodQuery and append QUERY to StdMethod.
  • Add hAcceptQuery for the Accept-Query response field name.
  • Re-export the new constants, add RFC-linked Haddocks, and extend method/header regression coverage.

This only adds the Accept-Query header name. It does not introduce Structured Fields parsing or a field-specific value model.

Compatibility

QUERY is appended after PATCH, preserving every existing derived Enum value. Adding a constructor to exported StdMethod can still break exhaustive downstream pattern matches, so the Haddocks and changelog target 0.13.

http-types.cabal remains at the currently unreleased 0.12.6; the package-version change is left to release preparation.

@sl1depengwyn
sl1depengwyn marked this pull request as ready for review July 22, 2026 19:35
@sl1depengwyn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@Vlix ping in case you missed this

@Vlix

Vlix commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Thanks for the ping, I'll be gone for a week, but will review this when I get back 👍

@Vlix Vlix left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like a fine addition.

Comment thread CHANGELOG.md

@Vlix Vlix left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I will merge this when I have time to publish.
I'd like to add this to the major bump I'm probably gonna do with #32, but I'll want to first "publish" it as a candidate and see what the general public feels about the additions.

@sl1depengwyn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I will merge this when I have time to publish. I'd like to add this to the major bump I'm probably gonna do with #32, but I'll want to first "publish" it as a candidate and see what the general public feels about the additions.

Thanks a lot!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants