You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In case a skip and limit are set, it just completely changes the API. Dynamically. This makes it extraordinarily hard to use the pagination feature (which btw, I love that it's a thing in the first place), especially as this is entirely undocumented. The first time I learned that this is a behavior was when my app suddenly started crashing when I implemented pagination.
I would like to fix this. Either by documenting it in the openapi docs or by changing the interface (scary).
I'm gonna make a PR for the first option soon but I wanted to have a better place for discussion so if you say "Yes, let us change the interface" I'll make a new branch and new PR (as I'll use the prior option in my usecase for now and I don't need cutting edge currently)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thank you for providing a PR for OpenAPI. The reasoning behind it is based on discussions I had for the previous Cockpit version (<v2). People wanted a simplified response structure (just the content items).
But I also get your concerns. A solution could be an additional parameter to force a specific response data structure 🤔
Howdy! I noticed that the code in modules/Content/api.php is incosistent in the value it returns:
In case a skip and limit are set, it just completely changes the API. Dynamically. This makes it extraordinarily hard to use the pagination feature (which btw, I love that it's a thing in the first place), especially as this is entirely undocumented. The first time I learned that this is a behavior was when my app suddenly started crashing when I implemented pagination.
I would like to fix this. Either by documenting it in the openapi docs or by changing the interface (scary).
I'm gonna make a PR for the first option soon but I wanted to have a better place for discussion so if you say "Yes, let us change the interface" I'll make a new branch and new PR (as I'll use the prior option in my usecase for now and I don't need cutting edge currently)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: