github
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1421529723 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5UutJ7 | 1850 | Write API in Datasette core | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 13 | 2022-10-24T22:13:24Z | 2022-11-29T20:11:20Z | 2022-11-29T20:11:20Z | OWNER | I need this for Datasette Cloud, and in thinking it through I realized that it's really time Datasette grew a default write API as well. I'm going to mostly model this off `sqlite-utils`, since I've spent a bunch of time iterating on a pseudo-JSON API for that over the past few years (piping JSON to stdin etc). I want this for Datasette 1.0. I'm going to be building it in the new [1.0-dev](https://github.com/simonw/datasette/tree/1.0-dev) branch, which is automatically deployed to https://latest-1-0-dev.datasette.io/ running on Cloud Run. API features to build: - [x] #1852 - [x] #1856 - [x] #1857 - [x] #1858 - [x] #1859 - [x] #1871 - [x] #1888 - [x] #1868 - [x] #1851 - [x] #1863 - [x] #1864 - [x] #1866 - [x] https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1882 - [x] #1862 - [x] #1874 - [x] https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1887 - [x] #1877 Bumped to later on: - #1855 - #1878 - #1873 - #1875 - Make sure CORS works - https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1889 - Alter a table - `sqlite-utils transform` style (more powerful than straight ALTER) - Execute SQL against a write connection - Maybe even multiple write SQL statements bundled in a single transaction - https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1867 | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1850/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | |||||
1468603401 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5XiRwJ | 1913 | Release Datasette 1.0a0 | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 9 | 2022-11-29T19:41:42Z | 2022-11-29T20:10:35Z | 2022-11-29T20:10:35Z | OWNER | I attempted the release just now - https://github.com/simonw/datasette/releases/tag/1.0a0 - and got an unexpected test failure: https://github.com/simonw/datasette/actions/runs/3577355358/attempts/1 ``` > assert delete_response.status_code == 200 E assert 404 == 200 E + where 404 = <Response [404 Not Found]>.status_code /home/runner/work/datasette/datasette/tests/test_api_write.py:396: AssertionError =========================== short test summary info ============================ FAILED tests/test_api_write.py::test_delete_row[compound_pk_table-row_for_create2-pks2-article,k] - assert 404 == 200 + where 404 = <Response [404 Not Found]>.status_code ``` I hit "retry" on that test but I expect it to fail again. | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1913/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | |||||
1432012302 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5VWsYO | 1877 | Refactor and tidy up final write API code | 9599 | closed | 0 | 1 | 2022-11-01T20:00:11Z | 2022-11-29T19:44:16Z | 2022-11-29T19:44:07Z | OWNER | - `views/table.py` has got a bit too big - I think the write classes should be pulled out into a separate module. - [x] There's duplicate logic for deciding if the table and database exist and checking permissions | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1877/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | ||||||
1450312343 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5WcgKX | 1892 | Merge 1.0-dev branch back to main | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 3 | 2022-11-15T20:04:25Z | 2022-11-29T19:40:23Z | 2022-11-29T19:40:23Z | OWNER | I'm committed enough to the 1.0 work now that I'm ready for the `main` branch to reflect that instead. If I need to make any dot-releases against 0.63 I can do those from a branch. | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1892/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | |||||
1450303205 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5Wcd7l | 1891 | 1.0a0 release notes | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 4 | 2022-11-15T19:58:20Z | 2022-11-29T19:23:41Z | 2022-11-29T19:23:41Z | OWNER | This release will mainly help preview the new Datasette write API: - #1850 | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1891/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | |||||
1425029275 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5U8Dib | 1864 | Delete a single record from an existing table | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 4 | 2022-10-27T04:53:22Z | 2022-11-29T18:54:04Z | 2022-11-29T18:54:04Z | OWNER | API design: ``` POST /db/table/row-pks/-/delete Or... DELETE /db/table/row-pks/-/delete ``` I'm just going to do `POST` for the moment, like I did here: - #1874 Permission: `delete-row` Still needed: - [ ] Tests for rowid tables - [ ] Tests for compound primary keys | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1864/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | |||||
1468519699 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5Xh9UT | 1911 | `/db/-/create` should support creating tables with compound primary keys | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 2 | 2022-11-29T18:30:47Z | 2022-11-29T18:50:58Z | 2022-11-29T18:48:05Z | OWNER | Found myself needing this to write the tests for: - #1864 | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1911/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | |||||
1425029242 | I_kwDOBm6k_c5U8Dh6 | 1863 | Update a single record in an existing table | 9599 | closed | 0 | 8658075 | 16 | 2022-10-27T04:53:17Z | 2022-11-29T18:08:53Z | 2022-11-29T18:06:37Z | OWNER | API design: ``` POST /db/table/row-pks/-/update { "field": "updated_value" } ``` Only the fields that you pass will be updated. Maybe this is the wrong design though? The design for insert currently looks like this: - https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1851#issuecomment-1294224185 ``` POST /db/table/-/insert Authorization: Bearer xxx Content-Type: application/json { "row": { "id": 1, "name": "New name" } } ``` I could use the same format for `/-/update`, but in this case the API doesn't require you to pass every field so `"row"` doesn't seem like the right key. I think I'll go with this: ``` POST /db/table/1/-/update Authorization: Bearer xxx Content-Type: application/json { "update": { "name": "New name" } } ``` The benefit of having an `"update"` key is that it allows me to use other keys in the future. Maybe a `"alter": true` key to indicate that new columns should be added if they are missing. | 107914493 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1863/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed |