Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.24%. Comparing base (97129a9) to head (a9fe8fc).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1074      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     97.22%   97.24%   +0.01%     
  Complexity     2834     2834              
============================================
  Files           175      175              
  Lines          9018     8843     -175     
============================================
- Hits           8768     8599     -169     
+ Misses          250      244       -6     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@icewind1991 Can I ask you for an example code snippet on how this event can be used?

I'm missing some logic which tells the code on what to do after the event was take care of or not.

THX

My current use case for this is here: https://github.com/nextcloud/server/pull/10880/files#diff-a8ef54ad5b45404480feafc1de1eea28R62 where it stores a copy of the mutlipart listing result and limits the output returned.

My current use case for this is here: https://github.com/nextcloud/server/pull/10880/files#diff-a8ef54ad5b45404480feafc1de1eea28R62 where it stores a copy of the mutlipart listing result and limits the output returned.

I see you are using it for caching the dataset for later reuse - got it.

Why are you passing the properties by ref then?

Because it also overwrites the returned properties to limit the number of results returned in the response.

Got it - THX

I was having trouble in the past as well with the missing capabilities to change the behavior of generateMultiStatus

What about a more generic approach where the whole method can be overwritten?

like emitting a generateMultiStatus event and in case not handled we fall back to the default implementation.

My use case was to chnage the content type from xml to json ...

@staabm what's our point on this? THX

The ability to overwrite the method would also work yes, this was just the minimal approach I found

@icewind1991 how do we continue with this one?

Rebased.

I would still like to have this merged as I believe that it provides a useful option for plugin authors at minimal cost.

Ported to the major version 4 release series in PR #1549