issue_comments
8 rows where "created_at" is on date 2019-07-20 sorted by reactions
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: user, author_association, issue, created_at (date)
id | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions ▼ | issue | performed_via_github_app |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
513437463 | https://github.com/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/issues/1#issuecomment-513437463 | https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/issues/1 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQzNzQ2Mw== | simonw 9599 | 2019-07-20T05:19:59Z | 2019-07-20T05:19:59Z | MEMBER | I ran xml_analyser against the XML HealthKit `export.xml` file and got the following results: ```python { 'ActivitySummary': {'attr_counts': {'activeEnergyBurned': 980, 'activeEnergyBurnedGoal': 980, 'activeEnergyBurnedUnit': 980, 'appleExerciseTime': 980, 'appleExerciseTimeGoal': 980, 'appleStandHours': 980, 'appleStandHoursGoal': 980, 'dateComponents': 980}, 'child_counts': {}, 'count': 980, 'parent_counts': {'HealthData': 980}}, 'Correlation': {'attr_counts': {'creationDate': 1, 'endDate': 1, 'sourceName': 1, 'sourceVersion': 1, 'startDate': 1, 'type': 1}, 'child_counts': {'MetadataEntry': 1, 'Record': 2}, 'count': 1, 'parent_counts': {'HealthData': 1}}, 'ExportDate': {'attr_counts': {'value': 1}, 'child_counts': {}, 'count': 1, 'parent_counts': {'HealthData': 1}}, 'HealthData': {'attr_counts': {'locale': 1}, 'child_counts': {'ActivitySummary': 980, 'Correlation': 1, 'ExportDate': 1, 'Me': 1, 'Record': 2672231, 'Workout': 663}, 'count': 1, 'parent_counts': {}}, 'HeartRateVariabilityMetadataList': {'attr_counts': {}, 'child_counts': {'InstantaneousBeatsPerMinute': 93653}, 'count': 2318, … | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Use XML Analyser to figure out the structure of the export XML 470637068 | |
513439411 | https://github.com/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/issues/2#issuecomment-513439411 | https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/issues/2 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQzOTQxMQ== | simonw 9599 | 2019-07-20T05:58:57Z | 2019-07-20T05:58:57Z | MEMBER | ```python 'Workout': {'attr_counts': {'creationDate': 663, 'device': 230, 'duration': 663, 'durationUnit': 663, 'endDate': 663, 'sourceName': 663, 'sourceVersion': 663, 'startDate': 663, 'totalDistance': 663, 'totalDistanceUnit': 663, 'totalEnergyBurned': 663, 'totalEnergyBurnedUnit': 663, 'workoutActivityType': 663}, 'child_counts': {'MetadataEntry': 1928, 'WorkoutEvent': 2094, 'WorkoutRoute': 340}, 'count': 663, 'parent_counts': {'HealthData': 663}}, 'WorkoutEvent': {'attr_counts': {'date': 2094, 'duration': 837, 'durationUnit': 837, 'type': 2094}, 'child_counts': {}, 'count': 2094, 'parent_counts': {'Workout': 2094}}, 'WorkoutRoute': {'attr_counts': {'creationDate': 340, 'endDate': 340, 'sourceName': 340, 'sourceVersion': 340, 'startDate': 340}, 'child_counts': {'Location': 398683, 'MetadataEntry': 546}, 'count': 340, 'parent_counts': {'Workout': 340}}} ``` | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Import workouts 470637152 | |
513439736 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513439736 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQzOTczNg== | SteadBytes 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} | Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope 463544206 | |
513440090 | https://github.com/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/issues/4#issuecomment-513440090 | https://api.github.com/repos/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/issues/4 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ0MDA5MA== | simonw 9599 | 2019-07-20T06:11:50Z | 2019-07-20T06:11:50Z | MEMBER | Some examples: https://github.com/dogsheep/healthkit-to-sqlite/blob/d016e70c31cf84ba0f5ec3102546db54a51aaffb/tests/export.xml#L4-L13 | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Import Records 470640505 | |
513442743 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513442743 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ0Mjc0Mw== | tomchristie 647359 | 2019-07-20T06:50:47Z | 2019-07-20T06:50:47Z | NONE | Right now the spec does say “copy the scope, rather than mutate it” https://asgi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/specs/main.html#middleware I wouldn’t be surprised if that there’s room for discussion on evolving the exact language there. There’s obvs a nice element to the strictness there, tho practically I’m not sure it’s something that implementations will follow, and its not something that Starlette chooses to abide by. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope 463544206 | |
513446227 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/537#issuecomment-513446227 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/537 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ0NjIyNw== | SteadBytes 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} | Populate "endpoint" key in ASGI scope 463544206 | |
513481493 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/43#issuecomment-513481493 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/43 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ4MTQ5Mw== | simonw 9599 | 2019-07-20T16:34:54Z | 2019-07-20T16:34:54Z | OWNER | Here's the implementation in `create_table()`: https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/blob/c88f0a4d4617ff832aa728aac1da3500548c3137/sqlite_utils/db.py#L235-L249 And here's where `add_column()` does its thing: https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/blob/c88f0a4d4617ff832aa728aac1da3500548c3137/sqlite_utils/db.py#L547-L552 | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | .add_column() doesn't match indentation of initial creation 470691999 | |
513481607 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/43#issuecomment-513481607 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/43 | MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDUxMzQ4MTYwNw== | simonw 9599 | 2019-07-20T16:36:34Z | 2019-07-20T16:36:34Z | OWNER | Hmm... is it even possible to fix this within sqlite-utils? Maybe this is a SQLite implementation detail. It's possible to update the schema itself - that's how we add missing foreign key constraints - but it seems a little bit of overkill to use the writable schema when adding a new column JUST to get prettier indentation: https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/blob/c88f0a4d4617ff832aa728aac1da3500548c3137/sqlite_utils/db.py#L316-L326 | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | .add_column() doesn't match indentation of initial creation 470691999 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] ( [html_url] TEXT, [issue_url] TEXT, [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id]) , [performed_via_github_app] TEXT); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue] ON [issue_comments] ([issue]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user] ON [issue_comments] ([user]);