Make body filters aware if they are dealing with a request or response about logbook HOT 6 OPEN

I think it can be helpful to make the right filtering decision if it had more context. As you mentioned, at least to know if it's a request/response and what's the origin.

As per the example you mentioned, I understand it's just an example, but just to point out that this is already possible. You could use the ResponseFilter for cases when you want to omit logging the response body based on some conditions. That's what ResponseFilters.defaultValue() is using via BodyReplacers to avoid logging bodies with binary data.

from logbook.

Thank you for the prompt answer @kasmarian . Honestly I was not aware of that, but yes it was just an example. That said I still see value in having more context in filters so that people have more flexibility to make decisions 🙂

Would this be something that your team would consider adding?

Thank you

from logbook.

We could have a look, yes, but I can't tell you any timeline promises. If you have time and desire, please feel free to suggest the changes, and we'll review them.

from logbook.

Thanks @kasmarian . Honestly I had no expectations time-wise. More than a matter of time and desire, I'm lacking deeper knowledge on how things are structured. But I will take a look and who knows, if I get some idea I will shared of course 😉 Have a nice weekend!

from logbook.

Was also thinking that it also be good to be aware of the status code, if you are dealing with a response.

from logbook.

A BodyFilter was meant to be just that, a filter for a message body. If you need more context or want to only apply something for requests but not responses, etc. then I'd argue you should use one of the lower-level abstractions like Request- or ResponseFilter.

from logbook.