Skip to content

Option to disable cookie store (2) #489

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

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

novitae
Copy link
Contributor

@novitae novitae commented Jan 27, 2025

A clean solution for #477. This is a duplicate of #488 (it was on my main branch and I wanted to make another PR).

@dolfies
Copy link
Contributor

dolfies commented Jan 29, 2025

Same comment as the dupe: I would argue that this should just be done by the user

@lexiforest
Copy link
Owner

Let me tinker on this idea while fixing other urgent issues.

@lexiforest
Copy link
Owner

I think this is actually a good idea, I know the users can use the dummy cookiejar to disable cookies in a session, but the elegancy of requests API is that you only need to import requests and that's it. The arguments are rich, but you don't have to import or know them if you don't need them. And with typehints, it's actually easier to discovery and safeguard the arguments.

My only question is: do you think discard_cookies is a better name?

@novitae
Copy link
Contributor Author

novitae commented Feb 20, 2025

My only question is: do you think discard_cookies is a better name?

Yes it is. I updated the for it.

@dolfies
Copy link
Contributor

dolfies commented Feb 23, 2025

I think this is actually a good idea, I know the users can use the dummy cookiejar to disable cookies in a session, but the elegancy of requests API is that you only need to import requests and that's it. The arguments are rich, but you don't have to import or know them if you don't need them. And with typehints, it's actually easier to discovery and safeguard the arguments.

My only question is: do you think discard_cookies is a better name?

It's up to you but I was just thinking we don't want scope creep on an already quite "batteries-included" library, especially when there's already a more powerful solution for this (a custom cookie jar)

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