Correct pagination logic when rate limiting data is present in response #425
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
🙈 The PR is closed and the preview is expired. |
|
We won't see this in action in the preview because of caching, so merging based on local testing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I see now why #422 made the builds so fast - it broke pagination, because of a bug in the 'find the thing we should be paginating in the response' logic. I've updated the unit tests to reflect the new output and got everything passing.
With a clean cache, this is what I get running the change locally for one of the extensions where we don't know the exact path, like mariadb: