ConfigureRouteHandlerJsonOptions naming

[NinoFloris]

Reading here I see what is ConfigureRouteHandlerJsonOptions today used to be named ConfigureHttpJsonOptions #39226

ConfigureRouteHandlerJsonOptions does not seem like a better name. Request.ReadFromJsonAsync and Response.WriteAsJsonAsync use the same options, yet these methods are commonly used from middleware which has absolutely nothing to do with route handlers.

/cc @captainsafia

[davidfowl]

cc @halter73 @captainsafia

Thank you for submitting this for API review. This will be reviewed by @dotnet/aspnet-api-review at the next meeting of the ASP.NET Core API Review group. Please ensure you take a look at the API review process documentation and ensure that:

• The PR contains changes to the reference-assembly that describe the API change. Or, you have included a snippet of reference-assembly-style code that illustrates the API change.
• The PR describes the impact to users, both positive (useful new APIs) and negative (breaking changes).
• Someone is assigned to "champion" this change in the meeting, and they understand the impact and design of the change.

[halter73]

API review notes:

• ConfigureHttpJsonOptions does seem like a better name than ConfigureRouteHandlerJsonOptions given that it also affects Request.ReadFromJsonAsync and Response.WriteAsJsonAsync.

API Approved!

namespace Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
 

public static class RouteHandlerJsonServiceExtensions
{
-    public static IServiceCollection ConfigureRouteHandlerJsonOptions(this IServiceCollection services, Action<JsonOptions> configureOptions);
+    public static IServiceCollection ConfigureHttpJsonOptions(this IServiceCollection services, Action<JsonOptions> configureOptions);
}

[captainsafia]

While working on the PR, I made another change to the API.

namespace Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
 

- public static class RouteHandlerJsonServiceExtensions
+ - public static class HttpJsonServiceExtensions
{
-    public static IServiceCollection ConfigureRouteHandlerJsonOptions(this IServiceCollection services, Action<JsonOptions> configureOptions);
+    public static IServiceCollection ConfigureHttpJsonOptions(this IServiceCollection services, Action<JsonOptions> configureOptions);
}

Amongst other things, this ensures that the class name and file name match. It also makes sense in the context of this change.

Thank you for submitting this for API review. This will be reviewed by @dotnet/aspnet-api-review at the next meeting of the ASP.NET Core API Review group. Please ensure you take a look at the API review process documentation and ensure that:

• The PR contains changes to the reference-assembly that describe the API change. Or, you have included a snippet of reference-assembly-style code that illustrates the API change.
• The PR describes the impact to users, both positive (useful new APIs) and negative (breaking changes).
• Someone is assigned to "champion" this change in the meeting, and they understand the impact and design of the change.

[halter73]

Makes sense to me. The goal here was to remove "RouteHandler" from the extension method name since it configures behavior for more than just route handlers. Renaming the class to also not include "RouteHandler" when it contains just this method is logical and was an oversight in the initial API review.

API Approved!