html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,issue,performed_via_github_app
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-512126748,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537,512126748,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMjEyNjc0OA==,14834132,2019-07-17T06:48:35Z,2019-07-17T06:48:35Z,NONE,"It looks as if the `datasette.utils.AsgiRouter.__call__` is the place to add this https://github.com/simonw/datasette/blob/90d4f497f9b3f6a5882937c91fddb496ac3e7368/datasette/utils/asgi.py#L101 .

The sentry_asgi middleware uses the `__qualname__` or  `__name__` attributes of the `endpoint` https://github.com/encode/sentry-asgi/blob/c6a42d44d31f85885b79e4ee898683ecf8104971/sentry_asgi/middleware.py#L84

Looking at the Starlette implementation `endpoint` is a `Callable` https://github.com/encode/starlette/commit/34d0097feb6f057bd050d5057df5a2f96b97384e#diff-34fba745b50527bfb4245d02afd59246R100 which as far as I can tell is analogous to the `view` function which is matched here https://github.com/simonw/datasette/blob/90d4f497f9b3f6a5882937c91fddb496ac3e7368/datasette/utils/asgi.py#L96 .

A slight issue is that  `__qualname__` is matched *first* in the sentry_asgi middleware, and `__name__` is used if that doesn't exist. I think (please correct me if I am wrong) that for datasette, the `__name__` is what should be used. For example, when using the development fixtures and hitting `http://127.0.0.1:8001/fixtures/compound_three_primary_keys` the `view` function that is matched gives:

```python
>>> view.__qualname__
'AsgiView.as_asgi.<locals>.view'
>>> view.__name__
'TableView'
```

Would `TableView` be the desired value here? Or am I looking in entirely the wrong place? :smile: 


","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",463544206,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-512930353,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537,512930353,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMjkzMDM1Mw==,14834132,2019-07-18T18:20:53Z,2019-07-18T18:34:03Z,NONE,"Ok great, getting the `__qualname__` to be `TableView` and adding `endpoint` to the `scope` in `AsgiRouter` is simple enough (already done). However, (unless I'm missing a plugin hook or something) the suggestion of utilising it within a `datasette-sentry` plugin may not work. The only hook that would have access to the `scope` is the `asgi_wrapper` hook. But as this _wraps_ the existing `asgi` app, the `endpoint` won't yet have been added to the `scope` received by the hook https://github.com/SteadBytes/datasette/blob/107d47567dedd472eebec7f35bc34f5b58285ba8/datasette/app.py#L672 . However, I'm not sure where else the `endpoint` could be added to the asgi scope :thinking: 


","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",463544206,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513439736,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537,513439736,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQzOTczNg==,14834132,2019-07-20T06:05:01Z,2019-07-20T06:05:01Z,NONE,The asgi spec doesn't explicitly specify (at least as far as I can tell) whether the scope is immutable/mutable https://asgi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/specs/lifespan.html#scope . @simonw using a header for this would be a nice approach. It would also potentially increase the portability of any middleware/plugins/clients across different applications/frameworks as it's not tied directly to an asgi implementation,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",463544206,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513446227,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537,513446227,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ0NjIyNw==,14834132,2019-07-20T07:50:44Z,2019-07-20T07:50:44Z,NONE,"Oh yes well spotted thank you 😁 

I agree that the strictness would be nice as it could help to avoid different middleware altering the scope in incompatible ways. However I do also agree that it's likely for not all implementations to follow 🤔","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",463544206,
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513652597,https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537,513652597,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzY1MjU5Nw==,14834132,2019-07-22T06:03:18Z,2019-07-22T06:03:18Z,NONE,"@simonw do you think it is still worth populating the `endpoint` key in the scope as originally intended by this issue, or should we hold off until a decision about possibly using an `X-Endpoint` header instead? :smile: ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",463544206,