issues
3 rows where type = "issue", "updated_at" is on date 2019-06-28 and user = 9599 sorted by updated_at descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date), closed_at (date)
id | node_id | number | title | user | state | locked | assignee | milestone | comments | created_at | updated_at ▲ | closed_at | author_association | pull_request | body | repo | type | active_lock_reason | performed_via_github_app | reactions | draft | state_reason |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
327395270 | MDU6SXNzdWUzMjczOTUyNzA= | 296 | Per-database and per-table /-/ URL namespace | simonw 9599 | open | 0 | 3 | 2018-05-29T16:23:13Z | 2019-06-28T16:46:34Z | OWNER | Initially this will be for subsets of To start:
This means we will no longer allow databases or tables to have the name We will continue to support rows with a primary key of
|
datasette 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/296/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
||||||||
327365110 | MDU6SXNzdWUzMjczNjUxMTA= | 294 | inspect should record column types | simonw 9599 | open | 0 | 7 | 2018-05-29T15:10:41Z | 2019-06-28T16:45:28Z | OWNER | For each table we want to know the columns, their order and what type they are. I'm going to break with SQLite defaults a little on this one and allow datasette to define additional types - to start with just a Possible JSON design:
Refs #276 |
datasette 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/294/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
||||||||
443038584 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDMwMzg1ODQ= | 465 | Decide what to do about /-/inspect | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | 4 | 2019-05-11T21:39:46Z | 2019-06-28T16:34:33Z | 2019-06-28T16:34:33Z | OWNER | It's not clear to me what this endpoint should do now as a result of #419 - it's still useful to be able to introspect databases for tools like datasette-registry, but since we aren't pre-calculating introspection data any more I need to rethink the approach. For one thing, this endpoint may need to be paginated. Or maybe it should be split up into separate endpoints for each connected database? Those should probably be paginated too seeing as fivethirtyeight has 400+ tables. |
datasette 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/465/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issues] ( [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [number] INTEGER, [title] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [state] TEXT, [locked] INTEGER, [assignee] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [milestone] INTEGER REFERENCES [milestones]([id]), [comments] INTEGER, [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [closed_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [pull_request] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [repo] INTEGER REFERENCES [repos]([id]), [type] TEXT , [active_lock_reason] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [draft] INTEGER, [state_reason] TEXT); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_repo] ON [issues] ([repo]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_milestone] ON [issues] ([milestone]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_assignee] ON [issues] ([assignee]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_user] ON [issues] ([user]);