-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
Add External ID Field to Contact Model #128
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
Merged
keith-chartmogul
merged 3 commits into
main
from
keith/del-1612-python-client-library-add-external-id-field-to-contact-model
Mar 13, 2026
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
[minor] Not specifically about this PR, but
external_idseems pretty much ambiguous now that it's next tocustomer_external_id; what external id is the second one referring to? Perhaps it's worth renaming it to something more specificAlso it'd be great if perhaps there is a comment/explanation as to why
load_defaultis neededThere 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.
Renamed the schema name for this field to
contact_external_idwhile ensuring that it is still sent to the API asexternal_idand added a comment regarding the use ofload_default.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.
No I mean it's how the field is called even in the REST API: there's
customer_external_idand there'sexternal_id. I think the update should've been in the REST API itself and the clients should adjust to it. That's what I meant by not specifically about this PR. Now you're sort of introducing something different here: for Python it'scontact_external_idbut everywhere else it'sexternal_id😅 right?I think we could just merge your previous version as-is and decide if we should rename
external_idtocontact_external_idon the REST API itself, and then all clients. Or maybe this was just subjective, depending on the consensus reallyThere 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.
Hmm, that was definitely not clear from your previous comment. If that is the case and you really feel strongly about renaming the field in the public API then perhaps I should sit on all of these client library PRs until that is renamed and then update these PRs accordingly. 👍