issue_comments

Table actions

3 rows where author_association = "NONE", issue = 463544206 and "updated_at" is on date 2019-07-20 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 2

issue 1

  • Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope · 3 ✖

author_association 1

  • NONE · 3 ✖
id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions issue performed_via_github_app
513446227 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513446227 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ0NjIyNw== SteadBytes 14834132 2019-07-20T07:50:44Z 2019-07-20T07:50:44Z NONE

Oh yes well spotted thank you 😁

I agree that the strictness would be nice as it could help to avoid different middleware altering the scope in incompatible ways. However I do also agree that it's likely for not all implementations to follow 🤔

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope 463544206  
513442743 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513442743 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ0Mjc0Mw== tomchristie 647359 2019-07-20T06:50:47Z 2019-07-20T06:50:47Z NONE

Right now the spec does say “copy the scope, rather than mutate it” https://asgi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/specs/main.html#middleware

I wouldn’t be surprised if that there’s room for discussion on evolving the exact language there.

There’s obvs a nice element to the strictness there, tho practically I’m not sure it’s something that implementations will follow, and its not something that Starlette chooses to abide by.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope 463544206  
513439736 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513439736 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQzOTczNg== SteadBytes 14834132 2019-07-20T06:05:01Z 2019-07-20T06:05:01Z NONE

The asgi spec doesn't explicitly specify (at least as far as I can tell) whether the scope is immutable/mutable https://asgi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/specs/lifespan.html#scope . @simonw using a header for this would be a nice approach. It would also potentially increase the portability of any middleware/plugins/clients across different applications/frameworks as it's not tied directly to an asgi implementation

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope 463544206  

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] (
   [html_url] TEXT,
   [issue_url] TEXT,
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [reactions] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
                ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
                ON [issue_comments] ([user]);