No x-url-delete header when sending POST request #151

New Issue

michael · 2026-01-19T18:29:12Z

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

Originally created by @anihm136 on GitHub.

I noticed that the x-url-delete header is not being set when the user uploads a file via post request. Is uploading files via POST deprecated? (since all the examples seem to use PUT requests instead). If not, I think the header should be set correctly

Originally created by @anihm136 on GitHub. I noticed that the `x-url-delete` header is not being set when the user uploads a file via post request. Is uploading files via POST deprecated? (since all the examples seem to use PUT requests instead). If not, I think the header should be set correctly

michael closed this issue

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub:

@anihm136 , yes, x-url-delete is not supported on POST.
Rather than merging the POST and PUT handler, I would remove the POST one, or add the x-url-delete header

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub: @anihm136 , yes, `x-url-delete` is not supported on `POST`. Rather than merging the `POST` and `PUT` handler, I would remove the `POST` one, or add the `x-url-delete` header

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub:

@anihm136

Is POST meant to be officially supported?

I kept updating the POST handler but for the x-url-delete, on the other side there's basically no documentation about it and all the scripts/examples refer only to the PUT handler.

I would have no regret in removing, I just wonder how many people use it and will miss it

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub: @anihm136 >Is `POST` meant to be officially supported? I kept updating the `POST` handler but for the `x-url-delete`, on the other side there's basically no documentation about it and all the scripts/examples refer only to the `PUT` handler. I would have no regret in removing, I just wonder how many people use it and will miss it

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@anihm136 commented on GitHub:

Is POST meant to be officially supported? If not, I could remove the post-related handlers and logic, else I can add the header

@anihm136 commented on GitHub: Is `POST` meant to be officially supported? If not, I could remove the post-related handlers and logic, else I can add the header

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@anihm136 commented on GitHub:

Well, I recently started contributing some features to one of the unofficial python clients, which uses the POST method (which is how I ran into this in the first place). Considering there is not much documentation on it, if any, I doubt many users would be using it. For the ones that are, you could share a deprecation notice in some form, and remove it in some time. The only advantage of the post handler that I see is that it takes the name of the uploaded file automatically, but there is lots of documentation on how to get the same experience with the PUT request as well, so I feel overall it will just be one thing less to maintain

@anihm136 commented on GitHub: Well, I recently started contributing some features to one of the unofficial python clients, which uses the `POST` method (which is how I ran into this in the first place). Considering there is not much documentation on it, if any, I doubt many users would be using it. For the ones that are, you could share a deprecation notice in some form, and remove it in some time. The only advantage of the post handler that I see is that it takes the name of the uploaded file automatically, but there is lots of documentation on how to get the same experience with the `PUT` request as well, so I feel overall it will just be one thing less to maintain

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@anihm136 commented on GitHub:

If this is indeed an omission, I would propose to merge the handlers for the POST and PUT requests. Instead, handling filename resolution can be separated into different functions based on the request method, since that seems to be the only difference between the two functions

@anihm136 commented on GitHub: If this is indeed an omission, I would propose to merge the handlers for the POST and PUT requests. Instead, handling filename resolution can be separated into different functions based on the request method, since that seems to be the only difference between the two functions

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub:

@anihm136 I honeslty don't have much visibility on the clients, I think that listing them on this repo could be valuable as well. could you help on that?

as for the POST handler, happy to remove indeed: but not before auditing as much as possible the clients around and how many of them rely on it.

in the meanwhile you're welcome to add the x-url-delete headers to the POST handler

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub: @anihm136 I honeslty don't have much visibility on the clients, I think that listing them on this repo could be valuable as well. could you help on that? as for the `POST` handler, happy to remove indeed: but not before auditing as much as possible the clients around and how many of them rely on it. in the meanwhile you're welcome to add the `x-url-delete` headers to the `POST` handler

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@anihm136 commented on GitHub:

I agree that it would be useful to list other clients here. I only know of a couple so far, but I'd be happy to help find and list more of them. In the meantime I'll add the headers to the post handler

@anihm136 commented on GitHub: I agree that it would be useful to list other clients here. I only know of a couple so far, but I'd be happy to help find and list more of them. In the meantime I'll add the headers to the post handler

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub:

@anihm136 great, thanks. looking forward for the PR

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub: @anihm136 great, thanks. looking forward for the PR

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@anihm136 commented on GitHub:

I have created a PR for adding the headers. Let me know how you'd like to begin work on listing existing clients (new issue, GH discussion or any other), and I can start listing some of the ones I've come across

@anihm136 commented on GitHub: I have created a PR for adding the headers. Let me know how you'd like to begin work on listing existing clients (new issue, GH discussion or any other), and I can start listing some of the ones I've come across

michael commented

2026-01-19 18:29:12 +00:00

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub:

I have created a PR for adding the headers

thanks, see my comment

Let me know how you'd like to begin work on listing existing clients

either an issue or a GH discussion is fine for me

@paolafrancesca commented on GitHub: >I have created a PR for adding the headers thanks, see my comment >Let me know how you'd like to begin work on listing existing clients either an issue or a GH discussion is fine for me

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: dutchcoders/transfer.sh#151

No x-url-delete header when sending POST request #151

No `x-url-delete` header when sending POST request #151