Vote #81630
未完了API: Unable to distinguish between user and group, for the assigned_to field
0%
説明
The assigned_to field for the issues resource, and the default_assignee for the projects resource return either a reference to an existing user or a group.
Yet, it's not possible to distinguish whether it is one or the other - at least not an easy one via the API.
Developers might have to perform additional requests to be API, in hopes of being able to determine if it's user reference or a group. This might not be as easy as it sounds. You only have the name to match against, which depending on display setting, a user's name will be outputted differently in the reference, making it a bit frustrating attempting to compare against.
Furthermore, there is always a change that a group shares the same id as a user (do not have enough understanding of the database schema)?
h3. Possible Solution
Add a new property to the assigned_to and default_assignee references, indicating exactly it's type.
E.g:
{
"assigned_to": {
"id": 1234,
"name": "Development Group",
"type": 'group',
}
}
{
"default_assignee": {
"id": 1234,
"name": "James T. Brandon Jr.",
"type": 'user',
}
}
journals
Just two notes:
Aed Art wrote:
> [...]
> You only have the name to match against, [...]
AFAIK you'll also get its @id@.
> Furthermore, there is always a change that a group shares the same id as a user [...]
I don't think that can happen.
Nevertheless, I agree that there should be a way for an API-user to determine what kind of @Principal@ they are given.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Furthermore, there is always a change that a group shares the same id as a user (do not have enough understanding of the database schema)?
Users and groups are both stored in the same database table @users@. Thus each principal (user or group) has a unique ID by definition.
Mischa The Evil wrote:
> Nevertheless, I agree that there should be a way for an API-user to determine what kind of Principal they are given.
I agree. For the author and assignees, we should distinguish three cases:
* regular user
* anonymous user
* group
Adding it to the API responses of most objects which have user references (e.g. issues, watchers, wiki pages, news, boards, ...) would probably be a good idea to make it easier to get additional information about the references user (e.g. to decide whether to use @/users/ID.json@ or @/groups/ID.json@).
Maybe we could just add a hard-coded @Principal#api_type@ (or similar) method for the various Principal sub-classes and use this method in the API views the same way we currently use @principal#name@ there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------