-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 850
Add Support for App Manifest Endpoints (apps.manifest.*) #1123
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
misscoded
merged 5 commits into
slackapi:feat-app-manifests
from
misscoded:1119-apps-manifest-endpoints
Oct 8, 2021
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4ade7da
Add support for apps.manfiest.* endpoints
misscoded 49003dc
Add support for tooling.tokens.rotate
misscoded 8d1b672
Update list of supported endpoints
misscoded ef8338f
Recover missed change in ci-build config
misscoded af2ba93
Checkout main version of ci-build change
misscoded 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
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.
@seratch I want to verify I've crafted these signatures correctly. For testing purposes (and as I mentioned in the corresponding PR), I used the following:
Again, since these tokens are so specific to this set of methods, I assume the explicit passing of the tooling token will be often utilized. Does anything need to change about the arguments to encourage this, or is what is here fine?
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.
First of all, for all methods except
api.test,tokenargument is available as part of kwargs. The current code works as-is.For apps.connections.open API method, we added
app_tokenthis way for consistency with Node SDK. We may want to have something similar for tooling tokens but I think that it's not really necessary so far.Speaking of realistic use cases, I don't think developers often want to use bot token along with tooling token in a single WebClient instance. When using apps.manifest.* endpoints, it's rare to reuse a WebClient associated with a specific workspace installation (except the case where you would like to send manifest via an existing Slack app; I don't think this is a common use case). For this reason, I think the current code should be fine.
If many people think explicit name of the argument should exist here and we receive such feedback a lot, we may revisit, though.