issue_comments: 1343724732

This data as json

html_url issue_url id node_id user created_at updated_at author_association body reactions issue performed_via_github_app
https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1939#issuecomment-1343724732 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1939 1343724732 IC_kwDOBm6k_c5QF5y8 9599 2022-12-09T01:40:44Z 2022-12-09T01:43:25Z OWNER

python Permission = collections.namedtuple( "Permission", ("name", "abbr", "takes_database", "takes_table", "default") ) I don`t think that design is quite right.

  • Elsewhere in the code the concept is called an "action" rather than a "permission" - I think I can stick with the Permission name here though, it's pretty clear
  • takes_database - is takes_ the right verb here?
  • takes_table can also refer to a SQL view or a canned named query

A question that was raised by the work in #1938 is whether you should be able to grant a permission like insert-row at the instance or database level - and if so, what does that look like? I think you should be able to do that, it doesn't make sense to have to grant it explicitly for every single table.

So maybe takes_table and takes_database are the right names here? But table is still bad because it doesn't reflect views and canned queries.

One thought is to use resource - but that will require a bunch of breaking changes to the existing APIs which treat resource as a tuple. Now's the best time to do that though before Datasette 1.0.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 1485757511