Output caching middleware

[sebastienros]

The goal of this PR is to gather comments on the APIs or feature gaps while I start working on unit tests in case there would be some significant changes.

This PR doesn't contain a custom store like disk or redis, this will be added as a separate one after this is merged.

Most of the low-level code is taken from response caching. I expect comments that could also apply to response caching, but we might decide to still do the changes only here.

Closes #40228 #40227 #40226 #40224 #40223 #40222 #40221

[ghost]

Thank you for your API proposal. I'm removing the api-ready-for-review label. API Proposals should be submitted for review through Issues based on this template.

[halter73]

Initial API review notes

[JamesNK]

• Nullable is enabled by default
• Enable trimming on new projects. Also, need to run a command line to update projects file passed to validator. See https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/blob/main/docs/Trimming.md

[JamesNK]

Alternatively, you can leave trimming to a follow up PR, just create an issue for it so it doesn't get forgotten.

[sebastienros]

@campersau thanks a lot, replied when I didn't follow your suggestions.

[dougbu]

Please also back out the src/submodules/googletest update

[dougbu]

What's our approval process these days for extending the shared framework❔ Was that process followed here❔

[sebastienros]

Nothing apart from api review where it was discussed.

[dougbu]

I don't know whether that's sufficient. @adityamandaleeka❔

[wtgodbe]

Confirmed w/ Aditya in triage that we want this in the SharedFx

[dougbu]

Thought we normally only referenced {blah}.Abstractions from Mvc.Core for middlewares. Why doesn't Microsoft.AspNetCore.OutputCaching.Abstractions exist❔

[sebastienros]

Abstractions were removed (after api review) since it ships in Framework and an abstraction is not on nuget.

[adityamandaleeka]

I assume the submodule change was unintended?

[BrennanConroy]

Please make sure all API changes are correct and any modifications are put in the issue for proper API review for the next meeting.

[BrennanConroy]

There are a few differences from the API seen in API review. For example, this class was renamed to CacheVaryByRules and three of the properties were { get; init; }

[wtgodbe]

CI was green on this PR: https://dev.azure.com/dnceng/public/_build/results?buildId=1840119&view=logs&j=3f6d4e0f-1b71-56b5-361e-d95b6e6da15a. Just merged an update to un-update the googletest submodule, which won't affect CI. Force-merging this now to get it in for preview6.

[ghost]

@sebastienros, this change will be considered for inclusion in the blog post for the release it'll ship in. Nice work!

Please ensure that the original comment in this thread contains a clear explanation of what the change does, why it's important (what problem does it solve?), and, if relevant, include things like code samples and/or performance numbers.

This content may not be exactly what goes into the blog post, but it will help the team putting together the announcement.

Thanks!

[ghost]

Hi @jerhon. It looks like you just commented on a closed PR. The team will most probably miss it. If you'd like to bring something important up to their attention, consider filing a new issue and add enough details to build context.