Open DakotaNelson opened 9 years ago
I think it would be a good idea to add the "delete" function, but leave the usage to the coder. I mean, it's not a thing the library should decide, but someone who wrote a program that uses the library (in our case, screeper
).
I agree. Expose it as a function call, and let whoever's using it decide how they want it to work.
As nice as a TTL value would be, I think it's too complex and too unreliable (doesn't actually get checked/enforced except when data is sent/received) to be justified in the "core" library.
It's also worth noting that some modules (Soundcloud, right now - presumably others, eventually) have caps on the amount of uploaded data, and old stuff must be deleted before new transmissions can be made.
Many (but potentially not all?) of the APIs we currently use allow for deletion of {tweets|posts|uploads|etc.}.
It would be interesting to be able to add a TTL value to posts so that they're deleted after a certain amount of time - i.e. if you upload some sensitive data that you want to disappear after a time, flag it to be deleted after it's received, or be deleted after N hours.
My idea for implementation would be that channels can implement an optional "delete" function - if it's present, when the 'receive' function is run, every post's TTL value will be checked and if the post is
then it will be deleted. Modules that do not implement a delete function will simply ignore the "deleted" posts in the receive function, but be unable to actually delete them.
Thoughts?