Skip to content
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

Provide a new command, gof3r info, which fetches metadata about an object. #72

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

reem
Copy link

@reem reem commented Sep 25, 2015

The new command will print some small bits of metadata about an object on
success and will exit with a non-zero exit code on failure. The info command
can be used to query for a file's existence without downloading it, and
performs only a HEAD request.

@reem
Copy link
Author

reem commented Sep 25, 2015

Will close #71 when merged.

…ject.

The new command will print some small bits of metadata about an object on
success and will exit with a non-zero exit code on failure. The info command
can be used to query for a file's existence without downloading it, and
performs only a HEAD request.

Fixes rlmcpherson#71
@rlmcpherson
Copy link
Owner

Thanks, I'll take a look at this soon.

@reem
Copy link
Author

reem commented Sep 27, 2015

I'm not a go expert, so please let me know if I did anything unidiomatic so I can correct it.

@BogdanSorlea
Copy link
Contributor

BogdanSorlea commented Jan 30, 2017

@reem - I've created a similar thing starting from your branch, only my approach is different in that it does not require GetObject permission to obtain the info about the object, requiring only ListBucket permissions (convenient for security-tight scenarios where listing the bucket is allowed - and possibly putting objects in it, but not obtaining the objects from the bucket).

Anyways, this was the PR which I opened against this repo, although I meant to open it against our own master: #118

It still requires tests and stuff, so it wasn't meant for immediate merge-in (but rather early review only), that's why it might look weird

I see the upstream repo is not really maintained anymore, so I have no huge hopes of it getting merged, but meh, I'm just throwing this out there

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants