-
-
-
-
reviewboard/webapi/resources.py (Diff revision 1) I think we should have a /validation/ resource, and add this as a child (/validation/diffs/). That'd allow us to add more types of validators down the road, without polluting the root namespace.
-
reviewboard/webapi/resources.py (Diff revision 1) Do we need the default of None? IIRC, Djblets's validation doesn't properly look in request.FILES. We should fix that... Either way, if path can be None, we should probably check that early and return an INVALID_FORM_DATA error.
-
reviewboard/webapi/resources.py (Diff revision 1) This is weird. Can we do one try block that builds the query, and another that executes?
-
reviewboard/webapi/resources.py (Diff revision 1) Wondering if create_from_upload could take a save=False to prevent actually saving the diff (and related objects), so we don't have to delete it after (and use up an ID).
Add an API resource to verify diff files.
Review Request #4252 — Created June 20, 2013 and submitted
Add an API resource to verify diff files. This change adds a resource to /api/verify-diff/ which accepts POST requests with arguments similar to DiffResource, but does not actually create a diff. This allows prospective clients (such as the web UI or rbtools) to validate whether a diff file will be usable before creating a review request for it.
Ran unit tests.
| Description | From | Last Updated |
|---|---|---|
|
Should end with a period. |
 chipx86
|
|
|
Missing docstrings for the API docs. |
chipx86
|
|
|
I think we should have a /validation/ resource, and add this as a child (/validation/diffs/). That'd allow us to add … |
chipx86
|
|
|
Do we need the default of None? IIRC, Djblets's validation doesn't properly look in request.FILES. We should fix that... Either … |
chipx86
|
|
|
This is weird. Can we do one try block that builds the query, and another that executes? |
chipx86
|
