html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,user_label,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,issue,issue_label,performed_via_github_app
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/pull/1931#issuecomment-1339916064,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1931,1339916064,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5P3X8g,3556,davidbgk,2022-12-06T19:42:45Z,2022-12-06T19:42:45Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"The `""return"": true` option is really nice!","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1473814539,/db/table/-/upsert,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1929#issuecomment-1339906969,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1929,1339906969,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5P3VuZ,3556,davidbgk,2022-12-06T19:34:20Z,2022-12-06T19:34:20Z,CONTRIBUTOR,I confirm that it works š ,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1473659191,Incorrect link from the API explorer to the JSON API documentation,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1871#issuecomment-1309650806,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1871,1309650806,IC_kwDOBm6k_c5OD692,3556,davidbgk,2022-11-10T01:38:58Z,2022-11-10T01:38:58Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"> Realized the API explorer doesn't need the API key piece at all - it can work with standard cookie-based auth.
>
> This also reflects how most plugins are likely to use this API, where they'll be adding JavaScript that uses `fetch()` to call the write API directly.
I agree (that's what I did with the previous insert plugin), maybe a complete example using `fetch()` in the documentation would be valuable as a āGetting started with the APIā or similar?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1427293909,API explorer tool,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1552#issuecomment-996229007,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1552,996229007,IC_kwDOBm6k_c47YT-P,3556,davidbgk,2021-12-16T22:04:39Z,2021-12-16T22:04:39Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"Wow, that was fast, thank you so much @simonw !
> I'm also not convinced that this configuration syntax is right. It's a bit weird having a `""facets""` list that can either by column-name-strings or `{""type-of-facet"": ""column-name""}` objects. Maybe there's a better design for this?
I agree that it's not ideal, my initial naive approach was to detect if it's an array, like what is done here:
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/blob/2c07327d23d9c5cf939ada9ba4091c1b8b2ba42d/datasette/facets.py#L312-L313
But it requires an extra query to determine the type, which is a bit problematic, especially for big tables I guess.
Taking a look at #510, I wonder if a `facet_delimiter` should be defined for that kind of columns (that would help our team not to have an intermediary conversion step from `foo|bar` to `[""foo"",""bar""]` for instance).
To be consistent with the `--extract-column` parameter, maybe an explicit casting/delimiter would be useful: `--set-column 'Foo:Array:|'`.
Throwing a lot of ideas without knowing the big pictureā¦ but sometimes newcomers have superpowers :).","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1078702875,Allow to set `facets_array` in metadata (like current `facets`),
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1552#issuecomment-995296725,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1552,995296725,IC_kwDOBm6k_c47UwXV,3556,davidbgk,2021-12-15T23:29:32Z,2021-12-15T23:29:32Z,CONTRIBUTOR,"@simonw thank you for your fast answer and your guidance!
While digging into the code, I found an undocumented way of doing it:
```yaml
facets: [""Facet for a column"", {""array"": ""Facet for an array""}]
```
The only remaining problem with that solution is here: https://github.com/simonw/datasette/blob/250db8192cb8aba5eb8cd301ccc2a49525bc3d24/datasette/facets.py#L33
We have:
```python
type, metadata_config = metadata_config.items()[0]
```
But it requires to cast the `dict_items` as a list prior to access the first element:
```python
type, metadata_config = list(metadata_config.items())[0]
```
I guess it's an unspotted bug? (I mean, independently of the facets-with-arrays issue.)","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",1078702875,Allow to set `facets_array` in metadata (like current `facets`),