issue_comments: 855278540
This data as json
| 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/1238#issuecomment-855278540 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1238 | 855278540 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDg1NTI3ODU0MA== | 9599 | 2021-06-05T18:33:25Z | 2021-06-05T18:33:25Z | OWNER | Got the test to pass by ensuring the tests don't accidentally double-rewrite the path. Ran into a new problem: ``` @pytest.mark.asyncio @pytest.mark.parametrize( "prefix,expected_path", [(None, "/asgi-scope"), ("/prefix/", "/prefix/asgi-scope")] ) async def test_client_path(datasette, prefix, expected_path): original_base_url = datasette._settings["base_url"] try: if prefix is not None: datasette._settings["base_url"] = prefix response = await datasette.client.get("/asgi-scope") path = response.json()["path"] > assert path == expected_path E AssertionError: assert '/asgi-scope' == '/prefix/asgi-scope' E - /prefix/asgi-scope E ? ------- E + /asgi-scope ``` That test confirms that messing around with the `base_url` doesn't modify the ASGI scope... but the fix I'm using for this issue DOES modify the ASGI scope. The question raised here is: should the ASGI scope stay unmodified when `base_url` is used? I think it should. It doesn't make sense to obscure the "real" path just to get custom pages to work properly. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | 813899472 |