Closed appukuttan-shailesh closed 5 years ago
In fact in the KG-based API I'm not currently storing the app_id
, only the collab_id
. Is there a use case where you need to filter by app_id
and not by collab_id
?
Not really.... in fact the concept of app_id
seems to make things confusing for users (who already have to deal with collab_id
). So I am happy to have it taken away completely.
you should now be able to filter models by collab_id
on the staging server.
For which other API endpoints is filtering by collab id needed?
register_model()
, edit_model()
, list_models()
are the only python client methods requiring app_id
. Amongst them, only list_models()
used it as a filter.
ok, please let me know if filtering by collab id works, I haven't tested it.
Filtering by collab_id
isn't working for me. I tried
mc.list_models(collab_id=343)
and
mc.list_models(collab_id="343")
Both returned 0 elements.
There is atleast one matching entry: https://collab.humanbrainproject.eu/#/collab/8609/nav/407995?state=model.21d03065-38e6-4720-bec6-dec4bdaff812
fixed the filtering by collab_id
It works :+1:
Many of the API calls allow filter by
app_id
. It is equally (or more) important to have the same filter usingcollab_id
.Partly necessary because a model catalog app instance could be deleted from a particular collab and replaced with another instance. The app IDs would vary in this case, but the collab IDs would remain the same thus making the models easily retrievable.
@apdavison : Is this doable along with the API fixes you are doing at the moment?