feat: add getRemoteSize() to ImageService to enable customization of inferRemoteSize behavior

[rururux]

Changes

As discussed in the issue #14515 and #15067, the current implementation of inferRemoteSize had the problem of increased network traffic because it did not cache data.
To address this issue, I added a getRemoteSize property to the Image Service and implemented the publicly exposed inferRemoteSize API to utilize this property.
Additionally, for baseService's getRemoteSize, I configured a function that simply wraps the existing inferRemoteSize. This ensures no breaking changes occur for users who do not wish to see their behavior altered.

• Set getRemoteSize as an API of the Image Service.
• Modified the publicly exposed inferRemoteSize function to utilize the Image Service's getRemoteSize.
• Assigned the existing inferRemoteSize function to baseService's getRemoteSize. This prevents breaking changes and facilitates easy, lightweight extensions based on the existing implementation.

Testing

I implemented tests to verify that arbitrary processing can be configured and that delegation from baseService to the original inferRemoteSize is possible.

Docs

Since we are setting the existing inferRemoteSize as the default value, I don't believe this constitutes a breaking change. However, since we will be introducing a new property called getRemoteSize in the Image Service, I think the documentation will need to be updated.

/cc @withastro/maintainers-docs

As this is a PR introducing a new property, I would like to hear the opinions of the maintainers regarding this approach. Therefore, I will submit this PR as a draft for now.

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: b87b7f1

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 9 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing rururux:infer-remote-size (b87b7f1) with main (bf62b6f)¹}

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on main (c5ea720) during the generation of this report, so bf62b6f was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[Princesseuh]

I like this! It'll need a changeset and a docs PR to this page: https://docs.astro.build/en/reference/image-service-reference/. However, just a heads up that we'll be freezing main very soon, so this might only land in v6, which would take a month or two to be stable.

[rururux]

Understood. Thank you for the review and the approval!

Regarding the changeset, should I create it as a minor change, or would patch be sufficient for this case?

[Princesseuh]

It'll need to be a minor since it's a new feature!

[rururux]

Thank you, I've added it.

[rururux]

I previously brought over the comment for getRemoteSize from inferRemoteSize, but looking at it again, it doesn't feel like the right fit for a property in the Image Service interface.

I’d like to update it to the following to better match the other properties. what do you think?

/**
 * Return the dimensions of a remote image.
 *
 * This is used to infer the width and height of an image from its URL,
 * allowing the service to provide necessary metadata when it's not available locally.
 */
getRemoteSize?: (...) => …

[rururux]

Also, I should probably rewrite the changeset as well. My apologies.

[rururux]

I've updated the comments and the changeset.
Please take a look when you have a chance.

[Princesseuh]

Hello! Apologies for the delayed response. This looks great! We're currently preparing for 6.x, so this will probably have to wait until we're ready for that to be merged.

[rururux]

Thank you!
I was just trying to see if I could change the base branch from main to next.
Which would be better, leaving it as main or rebasing it to next?

[Princesseuh]

If you have time rebasing onto next would be amazing!

[sarah11918]

Thanks for providing this changeset to accompany your cool feature, @rururux ! It's very helpful and well-written and explains your contribution well! 🥳

Just made some tiny suggestions for your consideration since we like to take this opportunity to hype up what you built, and why it's cool and people should use it! So, I've made some style suggestions below (in addition to adding () on functions!)

[rururux]

@sarah11918
Thank you for the detailed review and the kind words!
I'll update the changeset based on your suggestions! 🚀

[rururux]

Thank you so much for merging! 🥳☺️