This will relay a plus-plus action to the plus-plus service.
This must match the plus-plus token
This name is a little ambiguous any suggestions to alter it?
Tests? I'll look into adding some. I'll need to look into mocking requests
3 new commits added
Might be cleaner to have 2 separate endpoints, one for GET, one for POST
Small note about bool()
>>> bool('False') True
Would you recommend for GET to have the end point /plus_plus/<user>/status and for POST `/plus_plus//update ?
/plus_plus/<user>/status
makes sense.
ooh good catch let me think about this one
1 new commit added
all(e not in flask.request.form for e in ('increment', 'decrement'))?
all(e not in flask.request.form for e in ('increment', 'decrement'))
Looks good to me.
I think the way it is now compared to the suggestion is simpler and easier to read. So I think I'll stick with how it is.
Agree.
rebased
I just squashed the commits
Pull-Request has been merged by skrzepto
hmm just thought of one edge case right after merging. Should we force the plus_plus update/status to be for user hubs only or can groups use plus_plus as well?
This will relay a plus-plus action to the plus-plus service.