Expose limit for admin/users/list API #4861
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Expose querystring access to the "limit" parameter so that we're not restricted to only the first 100 users. (See also the discussion at https://meta.discourse.org/t/using-the-api-for-user-management-the-100-user-limit/37562.) Added tests to ensure that the parameter can't be used in a SQL injection attack, and that if anything is amiss it falls back to the previously-existing behavior.
|
You've signed the CLA, JaredReisinger. Thank you! This pull request is ready for review. |
|
Closing this as per @oblakeerickson's comments about the API design. 😄 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Expose querystring access to the "limit" parameter so that we're not restricted to only the first 100 users. (See also the discussion at https://meta.discourse.org/t/using-the-api-for-user-management-the-100-user-limit/37562.)
Added tests to ensure that the parameter can't be used in a SQL injection attack, and that if anything is amiss it falls back to the previously-existing behavior.
Do note that this PR is offered in advance of full agreement from folks that this is even a reasonable thing to do... but it gives a starting point for the discussion.