JSON-RPC request Content-Type is application/json #29946

1. 
   luke-jr commented at 10:36 pm on April 23, 2024: member

   This goes all the way back to #3246, and it’s not clear why text/plain has been used throughout.

   There seems to be a lack of specification of what the correct content-type is, but application/json seems correct and popular, and text/plain definitely isn’t.

2. 
   DrahtBot commented at 10:36 pm on April 23, 2024: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage

   For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	laanwj, ryanofsky

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

   Conflicts

   Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

   • #27101 (Support JSON-RPC 2.0 when requested by client by pinheadmz)

   If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

3. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Apr 23, 2024
4. 
   DrahtBot commented at 11:38 pm on April 23, 2024: contributor

   🚧 At least one of the CI tasks failed. Make sure to run all tests locally, according to the documentation.

   Possibly this is due to a silent merge conflict (the changes in this pull request being incompatible with the current code in the target branch). If so, make sure to rebase on the latest commit of the target branch.

   Leave a comment here, if you need help tracking down a confusing failure.

   Debug: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/runs/24176571360

5. 
   laanwj commented at 1:31 am on April 24, 2024: member

   IIRC we do return application/json content type, so this at least makes it symmetric. id be against enforcing this (because so many clients already specify it wrong), but the example would be better this way.
6. Bugfix: JSON-RPC request Content-Type is application/json f90a84d615
7. luke-jr force-pushed on Apr 24, 2024
8. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Apr 24, 2024
9. fanquake renamed this:
   Bugfix: JSON-RPC request Content-Type is application/json
   JSON-RPC request Content-Type is application/json
   on Apr 24, 2024
10. 
    fanquake commented at 4:13 am on April 24, 2024: member

    Removed bugfix given this is a doc/test only change.
11. laanwj added the label Docs on Apr 24, 2024
12. laanwj added the label RPC/REST/ZMQ on Apr 24, 2024
13. 
    laanwj commented at 4:26 pm on April 30, 2024: member

    Code review ACK f90a84d61505443fd3bb83253c091590b3dc7f45
14. DrahtBot added the label Needs rebase on May 16, 2024
15. 
    DrahtBot commented at 3:54 pm on May 16, 2024: contributor

    🐙 This pull request conflicts with the target branch and needs rebase.

16. 
    ryanofsky commented at 5:47 pm on May 16, 2024: contributor

    Code review ACK f90a84d61505443fd3bb83253c091590b3dc7f45, but I think it would be helpful to change description to something like “doc: specify json content type in rpc examples” because the current description doesn’t make it obvious that this is a documentation change, not a change in behavior.

    PR also needs to be rebased since #27101 was just merged and it conflicts

17. 
    fanquake commented at 3:52 pm on May 31, 2024: member

    Picked this up in #30215, given this is a very straightforward change, that just needed rebase and the commit message fixing.
18. fanquake closed this on May 31, 2024

    ---

19. 
    Amygo777 commented at 1:12 pm on June 1, 2024: none

    Nice
20. fanquake referenced this in commit f7a6d34449 on Jun 3, 2024

Contributors
luke-jr DrahtBot laanwj fanquake ryanofsky Amygo777

Labels
Docs RPC/REST/ZMQ Needs rebase