This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 2, 2022. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
more card actions #19
Open
fiatjaf
wants to merge
15
commits into
VojtechVitek:master
Choose a base branch
from
Luzifer:master
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
15 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
b56e69e
Allow cards to get closed (archived)
Luzifer 255b5e0
Allow moving a card
Luzifer 2939e70
card.AddComment now returns an Action
fiatjaf 255f8c6
Allow repositioning a card
fiatjaf 9b5ea97
Allow cards to be unclosed (dearchived, sent to board)
fiatjaf b0dc6a5
Merge branch 'return-action-from-addcomment' into movetopos
fiatjaf 338fc76
returning *Card instead of []byte from all card actions.
fiatjaf ad6249f
Allow cards to get closed (archived)
Luzifer 2d205bc
Allow moving a card
Luzifer a333cfd
Allow repositioning a card
fiatjaf 4fa576e
Allow cards to be unclosed (dearchived, sent to board)
fiatjaf 9a8191b
Merge pull request #2 from websitesfortrello/movetopos
Luzifer b216e4d
Fix merge fuckup (duplicate functions)
Luzifer 69012de
fix struct instantiation on card methods.
fiatjaf 358867e
Merge pull request #3 from websitesfortrello/more-card-actions
Luzifer File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there any endpoint that'd use different payload content-type, eg. JSON? Or is it always x-www-form-urlencoded?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think all of them are
application/x-www-form-urlencoded
. At least also thePOST
endpoints needs urlencoded parameters… (I implemented some more functions but with breaking changes)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Luzifer ok, cool. Pls, keep them coming, I'm willing to release breaking changes in v0.2 shortly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you want to you can take a look at the breaking changes here: Luzifer/go-trello@master...Luzifer:dev - switching from
[]byte
responses to objects also will be breaking for everyone relying on getting[]byte
…There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This project is not in stable version anyway, so we can just "tag" the old API and keep rolling :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice, I'm definitely interested in the struct type changes you made. Can you submit them as PR, please?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In that case I'd suggest to merge this PR containing
[]byte
responses and I'll change the responses in mydev
branch to objects. Would not increase the scope of this PR and create a clean cut for the next one…There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
btw: the
AddCard()
would be also a good addition, I like the validation funcs etc. -- what would you think ofThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I decided to use an extra struct because not all values of
trello.Card
are supported in creating a new card. (Also for example types of the position diffsfloat32
inCard
vs.string
inAddCardOpts
- In that case the API is not very consistent…)