Open
Conversation
Owner
|
I'm aware that there are multiple kinds of keys, but AFAIK they have the same format and it's not necessary to separate them on the API level. Your implementation makes it harder to write code. It's a bit more explicit but IMO it's easier to have one api_key variable and feed it write key if we want to write data (reads should work as well) and read key when we are only interested in reading data. In the second option writing data will raise an exception, which is IMO fine. Please, tell me if anything from the above is wrong. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Previous API key implementation was faulty and unusable: for private channels there is a difference between User API key (for modifying a channel or viewing its setup), Read API key (reading data) and Write API key (pushing data).