-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 95
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(client/sse): add {EventSource,Request}Init options param #109
Merged
jspahrsummers
merged 1 commit into
modelcontextprotocol:main
from
chrisdickinson:chris/20241230-add-eventsourceinit
Jan 2, 2025
+15
−8
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if we should set this before the user's given values, so they can apply a different content type if needed. I could see an argument either way (the argument to do it this way being: well, we will actually send JSON).
What are your thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah – I lean towards the library's
content-type
taking precedence because, like you said, the library ultimately controls the body of the request.That said, in similar libraries I've had some success letting the user inject their own
fetch
/EventSource
for greater control; that would let the user replace the body with their own encoding (if say, they wanted to send the request encoded in msgpack or XML instead of JSON.) I waffled a bit on adding that interface to this PR since it can feel like "over-injection", but it'd look something like this:(If you're interested I can open this up as a separate PR!)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense, thanks!
I think my preference would be to stick to standard
fetch
andEventSource
, and suggest that extreme levels of customization should just go into a custom, user-defined transport class. Transports are meant to be quite pluggable, specifically to support stuff like this. 🙂