Pär Dahlman

I'm really looking forward to this feature, too 🌟 Any update as to when we can expect to see this released?

Thanks for getting back on this. I'll take a look at yamlmember and get back to you if I find the time to implement this feature.

Thanks for the detailed response, its much appreciated 🙏 What you say makes sense and I agree that the behavior is according to the documentation. Here's a brief overview of...

@danielmarbach I'm not sure if you saw my question above (I forgot to ping you). It would be helpful if you'd find the time to provide some guidance on the...

Thanks for getting back on this. It sounds like a lot of exciting features are coming to Transactional session. We currently have separate endpoints for ASP.NET Core APIs and normal...

@mikeminutillo checking in to see if there is any updates on this issue? Is it on the roadmap, and if not: would an PR addressing it be appreciated?

Thanks for getting back to me, @DavidBoike. > It would be helpful to know a bit more about your motivations. It sounds like you are thinking of using the RabbitMQ...

Thanks for getting back to me and taking the time to look into this - its much appreciated! > So if you were developing against this locally, and your consumer...

So for the ant, it would contain multiple moves (aka `point[][]`), but each move (`point[]`) would only contain on point, namely the _target point_. The result would be an rendering...

Without being familiar with changes of `DiagnosticsHandler` reflected in the `main` branch, I believe that [this piece of code](https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/v6.0.8/src/libraries/System.Net.Http/src/System/Net/Http/DiagnosticsHandler.cs#L97-L115) from latest release (tag 6.0.8) is the reason why the headers...