Open kwilsonmg opened 6 months ago
Hi @kwilsonmg . Good catch! Thanks for raising this!
Looking closer into that, I see that the error is thrown as the vaultID
is not provided. However if go down the flow it uses item: Item = client.get_item(parsed_item.item_title, parsed_item.vault_uuid)
, which can find an item by title/ID only, so the vault_uuid
is optional here.
That makes me think that the fix for that might be slightly different than changing the USAGE.md
file. Simply saying, not throw an error if the opvault
value is not provided.
So are you saying that _vault_uuid_for_field
should be redefined to not throw an error or that we should try/except the error when that function is called in load_dict
? @volodymyrZotov
I'd say we just don't need to throw an error from _vault_uuid_for_field
as we should be able to find an item just by item_uuid
.
Your environment
SDK Version: N/A
Connect Server Version: N/A
OS: N/A
Python Version: N/A
What happened?
I am admittedly unsure what category to file this under, but I have discovered an error in USAGE.md. The
load_dict
example is inaccurate and will result in errors unless each item hasopvault
defined. If run without the fix (as below, though with values filled in) you get the following Traceback (or similar). This traceback also explicitly states the problem, which my pull request resolves.What did you expect to happen?
It should be as follows. This actually functions when tested:
Steps to reproduce
Notes & Logs