You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
storage.key.Key: add direct support for additional resource fields #313
Key.from_dict currently captures them all in the key's metadata attribute, but that name creates confusion with its metadata key (which stores application-defined key-value pairs).
I think it would be cleaner to map each the non-user-defined fields onto separate attributes, and propagate them to the server via the insert, and patch or update endpoints.
Key should also expose read-only properties for the non-writable resource fields not already mapped, and which aren't constants:
Is there some sort of existing implementation to compare against? I'm all for renaming the metadata dictionary as something else to clean up the namespace, but implementing all of these seems like it should be done carefully (hence learning from existing would be useful).
I don't know about other implementations. This issue (and the parallel one for Bucket) are pointing out gaps where we don't fully expose the API. It would be fine for @silvolu to say, "don't worry about those gaps for M1".
Activity
dhermes commentedon Oct 29, 2014
Is there some sort of existing implementation to compare against? I'm all for renaming the
metadatadictionary as something else to clean up the namespace, but implementing all of these seems like it should be done carefully (hence learning from existing would be useful).tseaver commentedon Oct 29, 2014
I don't know about other implementations. This issue (and the parallel one for Bucket) are pointing out gaps where we don't fully expose the API. It would be fine for @silvolu to say, "don't worry about those gaps for M1".
silvolu commentedon Nov 3, 2014
I think we should take action on both, but let's switch to
apitoolsfirst, and then we'll get back to this issue.silvolu commentedon Nov 4, 2014
It's fine to do this now, see #343 (comment)
feat: add api key support (#313)
feat: add api key support (#313)
feat: add api key support (#313)
feat: add api key support (#313)
chore(deps): update dependency pytest to v7.2.0 (#313)
32 remaining items
chore: [autoapprove] Update `black` and `isort` to latest versions (#313
chore(main): release 1.20.4 (#313)
chore(python): disable dependency dashboard (#313)
chore(deps): bump jinja2 from 3.1.4 to 3.1.5 in /.kokoro (#313)
chore(python): fix docs publish build (#313)
fix: resolve issues where pre-release versions of dependencies are in…
fix: Change `if` condition typo in `_get_children_of_element()` (#313)
fix: Refactor page.py to improve performance and organization (#316)
fix: correct migration doc (#313) (#317)
_default.default() now handles ImportErrors for optional dependencies. (
django/DatabaseIntrospection: implement get_primary_key_column, get_r…
django: set SchemaEditor.sql_create_fk = None
chore(main): release 1.4.0 (#313)
feat: add testing for Python 3.9, drop Python 3.5 (#313)
feat: add support for low-cost instances (#313)