-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 494
feature(webhook): Add remove event type #1762
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
Draft
mrdev023
wants to merge
1
commit into
gristlabs:main
Choose a base branch
from
mrdev023:work/mrdev023/webhook-trigger-add-remove-event-type
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If I understand your intent, you would like the
removeevent to give the data of the deleted record, right?I am not sure this would be necessary.
In comparison, DELETE operations in REST normally don't pass any body to the request (not allowed by the browsers), but the ID through the request path.
As you are in the context of the webhook, I would just pass the ID (if I remember correctly in the body) and nothing else.
What do you think?
EDIT: Also probably worth to take a look at what other products' webhooks do, to confirm or contradict what I say above.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hello. I've just casually stumbled into this PR out of curiosity because I would need it for my own use case. For what I need, the body would be really useful and the comparison with REST doesnt' stand, I think.
In REST, you can request the resource to know the content and then deleted it. With this trigger, the resource will be gone once you send the ID to the webhook and you don't know what was there.
In my specific case, I use an email as a primary key throughout the system and if a row is deleted in grist, I would need to delete it elsewhere in the system. The webhook would be very useful, but it should send me the email to know what to do with this info. Only the ID would be meaningless.
I hope this comment was useful and not off-topic.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@fflorent Sorry for the late reply, from my memory, i don't have access to the ID too but maybe i recheck Friday to confirm that.
@chobeat No, your comment is welcome.
@fflorent What do you think about the comment of @chobeat ?