We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
S3Object seems to be contention for new configs out of the gate and often times it's not needed and just needs to be excluded.
Idea for V4, as a breaking change, why not exclude S3Object by default, make it explicit that it needs to be turned on?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Closing to track with #380, S3Object will be disabled by default in the next version
S3Object
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
S3Object seems to be contention for new configs out of the gate and often times it's not needed and just needs to be excluded.
Idea for V4, as a breaking change, why not exclude S3Object by default, make it explicit that it needs to be turned on?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: