Coverage decreased (-0.5%) to 92.673% when pulling b3ebe3ae4b800589086312a4574bdb821b82529e on id_property into 7cd6d59e4270a451281e4f75fd7efe7bfe2e86e3 on master.
Coverage decreased (-0.3%) to 92.879% when pulling 441453027a59298ddda613d126926e92ba34e718 on id_property into 7cd6d59e4270a451281e4f75fd7efe7bfe2e86e3 on master.
Coverage decreased (-0.07%) to 93.086% when pulling b1dbe1d114151fc5c9f89032ec380cae4774ad07 on id_property into 7cd6d59e4270a451281e4f75fd7efe7bfe2e86e3 on master.
I think in the end this is the best solution. I don't want to compromise the simplicity of the api if there is another way to handle it.