Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: adding Blizzard ID to the search JSON #98

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 22, 2024
Merged

feat: adding Blizzard ID to the search JSON #98

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 22, 2024

Conversation

MatthewSH
Copy link
Contributor

As stated in #96, there's a new property on search. This will add it to the JSON from the search results.

This is a selfish addition as a way of preparing for the potential risk of them removing the automatic redirects from from the old URL format to the new format. This new property will allow us to capture the ID and start using that instead.

Copy link
Contributor

@sourcery-ai sourcery-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

PR Type: Enhancement

PR Summary: The pull request introduces a new property, 'blizzard_id', to the JSON structure returned by the search players request handler. This addition aims to future-proof the application against potential changes in URL redirection by external services, specifically targeting the use case described in issue #96.

Decision: Comment

📝 Type: 'Enhancement' - not supported yet.
  • Sourcery currently only approves 'Typo fix' PRs.
✅ Issue addressed: this change correctly addresses the issue or implements the desired feature.
No details provided.
✅ Small diff: the diff is small enough to approve with confidence.
No details provided.

General suggestions:

  • It's crucial to verify that the 'url' field, now being used as 'blizzard_id', consistently contains valid Blizzard IDs. If there's any possibility of it containing other types of URLs, consider implementing a validation mechanism or using a more reliable source for Blizzard IDs.
  • Given the importance of this new 'blizzard_id' field for future-proofing the application, it might be beneficial to document its purpose and expected values within the code or related documentation. This can aid in maintenance and understanding of the codebase for future developers.

Thanks for using Sourcery. We offer it for free for open source projects and would be very grateful if you could help us grow. If you like it, would you consider sharing Sourcery on your favourite social media? ✨

Share Sourcery

Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment to tell me if it was helpful.

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Feb 22, 2024

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

@TeKrop
Copy link
Owner

TeKrop commented Feb 22, 2024

Thank you ! I just updated the tests (still have to rework them in the future 🙈) and exposed "search player" model 👍

@TeKrop TeKrop merged commit f5108d2 into TeKrop:main Feb 22, 2024
2 checks passed
@MatthewSH MatthewSH deleted the patch-1 branch February 22, 2024 22:11
@MatthewSH
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ahh thank you! Missed those models (don't work with python, I'm a NodeJS dev).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants