way less spammy errors on bad requests.

[ghyatzo]

This is rather minor and left for last.

It simply adds a check to grab the error in case of a badly formatted request that cuts down on the spam that HTTP.jl does, and provides a more descriptive error other than "422: unprocessable event"

[juliohm]

Needs tests.

[juliohm]

Tests are failing on GitHub Actions for some reason. Appreciate if you could investigate further.

[ghyatzo]

There seems to be something wrong with the setup of the api keys.

The error is about the request url not being a valid uri. It seems creds["url"]is empty.

[juliohm]

We fixed CI builds before the latest release, and added new secrets. I'll double check soon. Thanks for looking into it. Em qui., 16 de jan. de 2025, 03:57, cschen ***@***.***> escreveu:

…

There seems to be something wrong with the setup of the api keys. The error is about the request url not being a valid uri. It seems creds["url"]is empty. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#60 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAZQW3KX4A244FLHBNWS7H32K5J7BAVCNFSM6AAAAABVG47XEGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJUGY3TCNJSGY> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[juliohm]

I've edited the README in the master branch, and CI passed successfully. Could this be caused by the fact that the PR is from a fork?

[ghyatzo]

Could this be relevant: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/73866908/github-actions-main-repository-secret-not-picked-up-from-pull-request-build ?

from the logs it really seems like ${{ secrets.CDSAPI_URL }} returns an empty string, so maybe Pull requests are not set up to see the secrets?

[juliohm]

That is interesting. I will test locally and merge if tests are ok 👍🏽