Proposal: StorageAdapter#upload should not return a file about valkyrie HOT 11 CLOSED

Putting it to a vote: 👍 for returning the ID vs a file, 👎 to return the File.

from valkyrie.

Rather than return the full file, what about the file_path? That would give the option to test for .exist? or other operations. If something wanted the file they could then use the path to go load it and incur the expense.

from valkyrie.

The File object being returned doesn't mean the content is loaded in. In fact, for most adapters it delegates to an internal IO object which probably hasn't read anything, yeah?

from valkyrie.

Perhaps there is more than just the file body? Could there be metadata (filename, mime-type) that would get loaded from somewhere?

from valkyrie.

I do wonder if we should standardize on a metadata attribute on File.

from valkyrie.

I don't think we want to return file_path because not everything has a path (S3/In-Memory). We could just return the file ID - but returning the File just feels so nice.

from valkyrie.

As long as the File doesn't need to be expensive, I think returning the File is nicer than returning the ID.

from valkyrie.

Vote!

from valkyrie.

Not just for this, I wish there was an :ambivalent: emoji response

from valkyrie.

Not too many votes here, maybe this needs more discussion? I'd rather not be the deciding vote without having a strong preference either way 😄

from valkyrie.

Closing until this shows that returning a File in a specific case would be either too hard to implement or too expensive to be realistic.

from valkyrie.