issues
110 rows where milestone = 3268330 sorted by id descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
id ▲ | node_id | number | title | user | state | locked | assignee | milestone | comments | created_at | updated_at | closed_at | author_association | pull_request | body | repo | type | active_lock_reason | performed_via_github_app | reactions | draft | state_reason |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
449886319 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDk4ODYzMTk= | 493 | Rename metadata.json to config.json | simonw 9599 | open | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 6 | 2019-05-29T15:48:03Z | 2020-12-18T20:34:39Z | OWNER | It is increasingly being useful configuration options, when it started out as purely metadata. Could cause confusion with the `--config` mechanism though - maybe that should be called "settings" instead? | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/493/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | |||||||
449854604 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDk4NTQ2MDQ= | 492 | Facets not correctly persisted in hidden form fields | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 4 | 2019-05-29T14:49:39Z | 2020-09-15T20:12:29Z | 2020-09-15T20:12:29Z | OWNER | Steps to reproduce: visit https://2a4b892.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_facet_m2m=attraction_characteristic and click "Apply" Result is a 500: `no such column: attraction_characteristic` The error occurs because of this hidden HTML input: <input type="hidden" name="_facet" value="attraction_characteristic"> This should be: <input type="hidden" name="_facet_m2m" value="attraction_characteristic"> | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/492/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed | |||||
444746021 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDQ3NDYwMjE= | 468 | Pagination for the database index page | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 1 | 2019-05-16T04:13:56Z | 2020-10-16T23:20:26Z | 2020-10-16T23:20:22Z | OWNER | Some databases have a LOT of tables. Now that we often calculate table row counts dynamically we could really speed things up by paginating the database index page, e.g. http://fivethirtyeight-datasette.herokuapp.com/fivethirtyeight If we're paginating, having a filter-search-for-table widget (similar to the search-for-database widget I'm planning for the homepage) would make sense. Related: pagination for homepage #461 and Datasette Library #417 | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/468/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed | |||||
443021509 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDMwMjE1MDk= | 461 | Paginate + search for databases/tables on the homepage | simonw 9599 | open | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 4 | 2019-05-11T18:05:34Z | 2020-12-17T22:14:46Z | OWNER | Split out from #460 - in order to support large numbers of connected databases the homepage needs to be paginated. | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/461/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | |||||||
440222719 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDAyMjI3MTk= | 448 | _facet_array should work against views | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 12 | 2019-05-03T21:08:04Z | 2021-11-16T01:32:05Z | 2021-11-16T01:19:40Z | OWNER | I created this view: https://json-view-facet-bug-demo-j7hipcg4aq-uc.a.run.app/russian-ads-8dbda00/ads_with_targets ``` CREATE VIEW ads_with_targets as select ads.*, json_group_array(targets.name) as target_names from ads join ad_targets on ad_targets.ad_id = ads.id join targets on ad_targets.target_id = targets.id group by ad_targets.ad_id ``` When I try to apply faceting by array it appears to work at first: https://json-view-facet-bug-demo-j7hipcg4aq-uc.a.run.app/russian-ads/ads_with_targets?_facet_array=target_names But actually it's doing the wrong thing - the SQL for the facets uses rowid, but rowid is not present on views at all! These results are incorrect, and clicking to select a facet will fail to produce any rows: https://json-view-facet-bug-demo-j7hipcg4aq-uc.a.run.app/russian-ads/ads_with_targets?_facet_array=target_names&target_names__arraycontains=people_who_match%3Ainterests%3AAfrican-American+Civil+Rights+Movement+%281954%E2%80%9468%29 Here's the SQL it should be using when you select a facet (note that it does not use a rowid): https://json-view-facet-bug-demo-j7hipcg4aq-uc.a.run.app/russian-ads?sql=select+*+from+ads_with_targets+where+id+in+%28%0D%0A++++++++++++select+ads_with_targets.id+from+ads_with_targets%2C+json_each%28ads_with_targets.target_names%29+j%0D%0A++++++++++++where+j.value+%3D+%3Ap0%0D%0A++++++++%29+limit+101&p0=people_who_match%3Ainterests%3ABlack+%28Color%29 So we need to do something a lot smarter here. I'm not sure what the fix will look like, or even if it's feasible given that views don't have a rowid to hook into so the JSON faceting SQL may have to be completely rewritten. ``` datasette publish cloudrun \ russian-ads.db \ --name json-view-facet-bug-demo \ --branch master \ --extra-options "--config sql_time_limit_ms:5000 --config facet_time_limit_ms:5000" ``` | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/448/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed | |||||
440134714 | MDU6SXNzdWU0NDAxMzQ3MTQ= | 446 | Define mechanism for plugins to return structured data | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 7 | 2019-05-03T17:00:16Z | 2020-10-02T00:08:54Z | 2020-10-02T00:08:47Z | OWNER | Several plugin hooks now expect plugins to return data in a specific shape - notably the new output format hook and the custom facet hook. These use Python dictionaries right now but that's quite error prone: it would be good to have a mechanism that supported a more structured format. Full list of current hooks is here: https://datasette.readthedocs.io/en/latest/plugins.html#plugin-hooks | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/446/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed | |||||
398011658 | MDU6SXNzdWUzOTgwMTE2NTg= | 398 | Ensure downloading a 100+MB SQLite database file works | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 3 | 2019-01-10T20:57:52Z | 2020-12-05T19:36:27Z | 2020-12-05T19:36:27Z | OWNER | I've seen attempted downloads of large files fail after about ten seconds. | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/398/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed | |||||
374953006 | MDU6SXNzdWUzNzQ5NTMwMDY= | 369 | Interface should show same JSON shape options for custom SQL queries | gfrmin 416374 | open | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 2 | 2018-10-29T10:39:15Z | 2020-05-30T17:24:06Z | CONTRIBUTOR | At the moment the page returning a custom SQL query shows the JSON and CSV APIs, but not the multiple JSON shapes. However, adding the `_shape` parameter to the JSON API URL manually still works, so perhaps there should be consistency in the interface by having the same "Advanced Export" box for custom SQL queries. | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/369/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | |||||||
324188953 | MDU6SXNzdWUzMjQxODg5NTM= | 272 | Port Datasette to ASGI | simonw 9599 | closed | 0 | simonw 9599 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 42 | 2018-05-17T21:16:32Z | 2019-06-24T04:54:15Z | 2019-06-24T03:33:06Z | OWNER | Datasette doesn't take much advantage of Sanic, and I'm increasingly having to work around parts of it because of idiosyncrasies that are specific to Datasette - caring about the exact order of querystring arguments for example. Since Datasette is GET-only our needs from a web framework are actually pretty slim. This becomes more important as I expand the plugins #14 framework. Am I sure I want the plugin ecosystem to depend on a Sanic if I might move away from it in the future? If Datasette wasn't all about async/await I would use WSGI, but today it makes more sense to use ASGI. I'd like to be confident that switching to ASGI would still give me the excellent performance that Sanic provides. https://github.com/django/asgiref/blob/master/specs/asgi.rst | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/272/reactions", "total_count": 1, "+1": 1, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | completed | ||||
323658641 | MDU6SXNzdWUzMjM2NTg2NDE= | 262 | Add ?_extra= mechanism for requesting extra properties in JSON | simonw 9599 | open | 0 | Datasette 1.0 3268330 | 27 | 2018-05-16T14:55:42Z | 2023-03-29T06:22:22Z | OWNER | Datasette views currently work by creating a set of data that should be returned as JSON, then defining an additional, optional `template_data()` function which is called if the view is being rendered as HTML. This `template_data()` function calculates extra template context variables which are necessary for the HTML view but should not be included in the JSON. Example of how that is used today: https://github.com/simonw/datasette/blob/2b79f2bdeb1efa86e0756e741292d625f91cb93d/datasette/views/table.py#L672-L704 With features like Facets in #255 I'm beginning to want to move more items into the `template_data()` - in the case of facets it's the `suggested_facets` array. This saves that feature from being calculated (involving several SQL queries) for the JSON case where it is unlikely to be used. But... as an API user, I want to still optionally be able to access that information. Solution: Add a `?_extra=suggested_facets&_extra=table_metadata` argument which can be used to optionally request additional blocks to be added to the JSON API. Then redefine as many of the current `template_data()` features as extra arguments instead, and teach Datasette to return certain extras by default when rendering templates. This could allow the JSON representation to be slimmed down further (removing e.g. the `table_definition` and `view_definition` keys) while still making that information available to API users who need it. | datasette 107914493 | issue | {"url": "https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/262/reactions", "total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issues] ( [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [number] INTEGER, [title] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [state] TEXT, [locked] INTEGER, [assignee] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [milestone] INTEGER REFERENCES [milestones]([id]), [comments] INTEGER, [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [closed_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [pull_request] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [repo] INTEGER REFERENCES [repos]([id]), [type] TEXT , [active_lock_reason] TEXT, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [draft] INTEGER, [state_reason] TEXT); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_repo] ON [issues] ([repo]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_milestone] ON [issues] ([milestone]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_assignee] ON [issues] ([assignee]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issues_user] ON [issues] ([user]);