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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
660355904 | MDU6SXNzdWU2NjAzNTU5MDQ= | 43 | github-to-sqlite tags command for fetching tags | 9599 | closed | 0 | 4 | 2020-07-18T20:14:12Z | 2020-07-18T23:05:56Z | 2020-07-18T21:52:15Z | MEMBER | Fetches paginated data from https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/tags | 207052882 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite/issues/43/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | ||||||
611284481 | MDU6SXNzdWU2MTEyODQ0ODE= | 38 | [Feature Request] Support Repo Name in Search 🥺 | 5779832 | closed | 0 | 4 | 2020-05-02T22:08:51Z | 2020-05-03T02:34:32Z | 2020-05-02T23:15:11Z | NONE | ## Description Per your [v2.2 release tweet](https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1256700238099693568) I played with the demo, but the output did not match my expectations. ## Expected Behavior Expected a search query for "twitter" contained within the `repo` column to return non-zero results. ## Actual Behavior 😭 [0 rows where repo contains "twitter" sorted by starred_at descending](https://github-to-sqlite.dogsheep.net/github/stars?repo__contains=twitter&_sort_desc=starred_at) ## Best Explanation Per the table schema (see appendix) `repo` is of type `INTEGER` which built from `repo_id` and does not expose the repo name in search. ## Desired Behavior Given that searching for "206156866" is less intuitive than "twitter", it would be great to support this via extending the search capabilities or by adding an additional column. ✅ 104 rows where repo contains "twitter" ❌ [104 rows where repo contains "206156866" sorted by starred_at descending](https://github-to-sqlite.dogsheep.net/github/stars?repo__contains=206156866&_sort_desc=starred_at) ## Appendix ``` CREATE TABLE [stars] ( [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [repo] INTEGER REFERENCES [repos]([id]), [starred_at] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([user], [repo]) ); CREATE INDEX [idx_stars_repo] ON [stars] ([repo]); CREATE INDEX [idx_stars_user] ON [stars] ([user]); ``` | 207052882 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite/issues/38/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | ||||||
609950090 | MDU6SXNzdWU2MDk5NTAwOTA= | 33 | Fall back to authentication via ENV | 2029 | closed | 0 | 4 | 2020-04-30T12:58:14Z | 2020-05-02T18:46:10Z | 2020-05-02T18:45:37Z | NONE | Would you accept a PR that falls back to looking for an environment variable for the GitHub token? Specifically a change here: https://github.com/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite/blob/c34d5a18bfc41fa08755ba3d5cf9fe09ff204238/github_to_sqlite/cli.py#L271 I'd like to use `github-to-sqlite` in a GitHub Action workflow and this would be simpler than trying to fill out the prompt or generate a file with sensitive content. Wanted to check first, I'm happy to submit a PR with tests and updates to the docs. | 207052882 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite/issues/33/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | ||||||
546051181 | MDU6SXNzdWU1NDYwNTExODE= | 16 | Exception running first command: IndexError: list index out of range | 15092 | closed | 0 | 4 | 2020-01-07T03:01:58Z | 2020-04-14T18:37:21Z | 2020-04-14T18:37:21Z | NONE | Exception running first command without an existing db or auth. ```py > mkdir ~/.github/coala > /usr/bin/github-to-sqlite repos ~/.github/coala coala Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/github-to-sqlite", line 11, in <module> load_entry_point('github-to-sqlite==0.6', 'console_scripts', 'github-to-sqlite')() File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/click/core.py", line 764, in __call__ return self.main(*args, **kwargs) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/click/core.py", line 717, in main rv = self.invoke(ctx) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/click/core.py", line 1137, in invoke return _process_result(sub_ctx.command.invoke(sub_ctx)) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/click/core.py", line 956, in invoke return ctx.invoke(self.callback, **ctx.params) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/click/core.py", line 555, in invoke return callback(*args, **kwargs) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/github_to_sqlite/cli.py", line 163, in repos utils.save_repo(db, repo) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/github_to_sqlite/utils.py", line 120, in save_repo to_save["owner"] = save_user(db, to_save["owner"]) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/github_to_sqlite/utils.py", line 61, in save_user return db["users"].upsert(to_save, pk="id", alter=True).last_pk File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sqlite_utils/db.py", line 1135, in upsert extracts=extracts, File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sqlite_utils/db.py", line 1162, in upsert_all upsert=True, File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sqlite_utils/db.py", line 1105, in insert_all row = list(self.rows_where("rowid = ?", [self.last_rowid]))[0] IndexError: list index out of range ``` | 207052882 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite/issues/16/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed | ||||||
544571092 | MDU6SXNzdWU1NDQ1NzEwOTI= | 15 | Assets table with downloads | 2029 | closed | 0 | 5225818 | 4 | 2020-01-02T13:05:28Z | 2020-03-28T12:17:01Z | 2020-03-23T19:17:32Z | NONE | The `releases` command extracts the releases table, but data about the individual assets are locked up in the JSON document in the `assets` field. My main interest is in individual and aggregate download counts. I was wondering if creating a new table with a record per asset may be useful? If so I'm happy to send a PR when I get a moment. Do you have opinions about that simply being part of the `releases` command or would you prefer a separate command as well? | 207052882 | issue | { "url": "https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite/issues/15/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0 } |
completed |