HTTP message headers vs Message object headers

[jonaslagoni]

Given that the native message object allows you to define headers, what's the reason behind having the HTTP message bindings define their own property for defining headers?

[derberg]

this is a good question 🤔
@fmvilas I can't figure that out from commit history

[fmvilas]

Yeah, I think this is just because I completely forgot about it when creating the HTTP binding. We should definitely remove it in favor of message headers IMHO.

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️

[jonaslagoni]

Same with WebSocket 🤔

[fmvilas]

I now remember why. Message headers are application-specific headers and the binding headers are protocol-specific headers. It's just a separation of concerns. This way, for instance, you can have the same message for two different protocols but still be able to provide specific headers for HTTP and for others.

[jonaslagoni]

Ahhh, that makes sense!

Wonder if we should include this piece of information in the bindings? 🤔

[fmvilas]

Yeah, wouldn't hurt to remind it there. We saw it can be easily forgotten 😄

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️

[jonaslagoni]

Reason for the difference can be read here: #158 (comment)