[julik]

Requiring a header "just because you sniffed it to usually be there" is not Amazon being cynical, it's creatively-developing-overly-strict-checks. And it happens on the side of the S3-compatible service.

If your service no longer works with the AWS SDK because you crash at `headers["content-md5"]` just because "it seemed a good way to make things more correct" - it is on you to fix it, IMO.

Like, this changeset https://github.com/minio/minio/pull/20855/files#diff-be83836...

Why does Minio mandate the presence of Content-MD5? Is it in the docs somewhere for the S3 "protocol"? No, it's not. It's someone wanting to "be extra correct with validating user input" and thus creating a subtle extra restriction on the interface they do not control.

[jameslars]

I think you misread my response. I think assuming Amazon did this to hurt “s3 compatible” services is cynical. Amazon implemented a feature, well within their rights. Writing a blog post saying they “broke backwards compatibility” is cynical and disingenuous. Amazon never committed to supporting any random use of their SDK.

[julik]

I did, mea culpa!