Closed bronger closed 8 years ago
Thank you for your PR! Indeed, such functionalities should appear in the library.
For the PR to be merged, some things have to be taken into account:
If you want, I can take care of that.
Note that this is also possible for non-members. However, you need an app key and secret, and this is only set in the MemberAPI class. I don't know whether this is as intended or whether you plan to give the PublicAPI optional _key and _secret fields.
My idea was to offer PublicAPI
to every user, even if he doesn't have any credentials. So far I don't see any case where a digital library might want to use such PublicAPI
with credentials, when a more powerful API is available at the same time.
I improved the PR. I hope that I left only little work for you to do.
Thanks! Indeed, only small impromevents are needed.
Anyway, I noticed that the behaviour of the API has changed, so I have to fix the library before releasing a new version - one should simply not release broken code. Is this PR urgent or can it wait, let's say, two weeks?
There is no need for hurry. We are working with a local fork for the time being.
We need the following workflow:
For this workflow, I added two methods to
MemberAPI
.Note that this is also possible for non-members. However, you need an app key and secret, and this is only set in the
MemberAPI
class. I don't know whether this is as intended or whether you plan to give thePublicAPI
optional_key
and_secret
fields.