License
explodingcamera opened this issue · 12 comments
Hi, I love chi and would like to keep using this middleware, however I can't because it doesn't have a license.
Would you mind maybe adding something like a MIT license to this repo?
@explodingcamera sure, create a PR with a LICENSE file matching go-chi/go and I'm sure we can merge. Thanks
Speaking of license, this project is a fork of github.com/rs/cors and removed the original license. You might have missed the part of the original license that says:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
copies or substantial portions of the Software.
I also don't really understand why you forked the project instead of submitting a PR, but well…
@explodingcamera @rs thanks for pointing this out.
May I ask why this fork is needed?
@rs I'm not sure to be honest. Probably some middleware specific code?
I'll diff the source codes and let you know.
I looked at the diff and the only noticeable difference is the passing of the request in the AllowOriginFunc parameter, which 1/ should not make the original library more or less compatible with chi middleware construct, and 2/ is a feature that could have been discussed for addition in the main library.
Just added a chi integration example: rs/cors@0202607. It works out of the box.
Yeah, looks like
- AllowOriginFunc func(origin string) bool
+ AllowOriginFunc func(r *http.Request, origin string) boolis the only major API change. Alongside with some clean-up of Negroni and Martini interfaces, which we've never intended to use.
Let me have a look at the API change a bit deeper.
@rs looks like we do use *http.Request in the AllowOriginFunc to get some additional info about the request itself, ie. what scheme://domain/path the request was meant for and/or potentially some more per-request specific data.
I guess this was the reason for the hard fork originally, since it was a breaking API change.
AllowOriginFunc func(r *http.Request, origin string) boolIs that something github.com/rs/cors could potentially adopt? Any ideas how, since the function signature is different?
Thanks for taking your time with us.
We can introduce a new option with the added param. I think it is useful addition.
@rs AllowOriginRequestFunc ?
Yes, something like that