Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: Add guild_id parameter to Client.entitlements() #2597

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

lukenamop
Copy link
Contributor

@lukenamop lukenamop commented Oct 4, 2024

Summary

Entitlements can be owned by guilds that the bot is no longer a member of. The added guild_id parameter allows the Client.entitlements() function to filter by raw guild_id rather than requiring a Snowflake (guild) object.

Information

  • This PR fixes an issue.
  • This PR adds something new (e.g. new method or parameters).
  • This PR is a breaking change (e.g. methods or parameters removed/renamed).
  • This PR is not a code change (e.g. documentation, README, typehinting,
    examples, ...).

Checklist

  • I have searched the open pull requests for duplicates.
  • If code changes were made then they have been tested.
    • I have updated the documentation to reflect the changes.
  • If type: ignore comments were used, a comment is also left explaining why.
  • I have updated the changelog to include these changes.

Signed-off-by: lukenamop <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: lukenamop <[email protected]>
@NeloBlivion
Copy link
Member

This is not necessary as you can pass an Object to guild instead (as the only requirement is being a Snowflake, i.e. having an ID)

@lukenamop
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fair enough. I didn't find that super intuitive but I guess it does work.

@lukenamop
Copy link
Contributor Author

Got it working with discord.Object for now. I still think directly passing the ID would be more intuitive but this does work.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants