Xuanwo
> be able to handle all scenarios. A crate doesn't need to handle all scenarios. It's quite useful even if it’s only rewritten for ELF. I encourage publishing a crate...
Thank you very much for completing this. I will look into the API to see how we can implement it.
Hi, @linhr. Thanks to @meteorgan's work, I beleive this integration should just work: https://github.com/apache/opendal/pull/5543
Hi, @meteorgan can we close this issue now?
> and we need to finish [#4075](https://github.com/apache/opendal/issues/4075) first. I'm not sure if it's a good idea to implement tags support. Since it's not widely used, let's implement `put_multipart_opts` directly without...
No action required at this time, so I’m closing this for now. Please feel free to reopen it if you believe further work is needed.
-0 on this. I'm not in favor of re-exporting other crates based on my own experience. However, as @xxchan mentioned, there aren't many drawbacks, so I'm okay if someone wants...
> Will `ofs` (opendal-fs?) be a library or a CLI tool? I expect to have both lib and cli, but that depends on the code owner's decision.
> I think we should update the goals of this idea, the goals listed above seems be implemented in https://github.com/apache/opendal/pull/4179 Agreed, I will update the goals.
Makes sense! We may also release `opendal_benches` and `opendal_fuzz`. We rely on the internal scheme's resolve logic, and we need to address those dependencies first.