Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add, remove recipients #72

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

smcoll
Copy link
Contributor

@smcoll smcoll commented Feb 1, 2016

Here is a proposal for #70. i wish that the add_envelope_recipient shortcut would return a JSON object for the one recipient, but given the way DocuSign returns a response of all recipient types, i thought that might get a little wonky.

@@ -460,3 +509,4 @@ def get_template(self, templateId):
.format(accountId=self.account_id,
templateId=templateId)
return self.get(url)

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems to be why flake8 fails

@zebuline
Copy link
Contributor

Nice work ! Is it possible to add some tests ?

@smcoll
Copy link
Contributor Author

smcoll commented Jul 27, 2016

@zebuline yes, but not promptly. Also note, @kbussell had another approach mentioned in the thread for #70. If you prefer it, we could go that route instead.

data = {
'signers': [{'recipientId': x} for x in recipientIds]
}
return self.delete(url, data=data)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A simple test would be to check all that formatting:

def test_delete_envelope...(self):
    client = ...
    with patch('DocusignClient.delete') as delete:
        client.delete_enveleop_recipients(...)

This way we have coverage of this unit of code. The integration with docusign process is another test strategy that could be done with in-house integration plateform.

@zebuline
Copy link
Contributor

@smcoll I planned to release the 1.0 in few days, do you want to change something on this PR, or at least rebase it on master, just to be sure ?

@zebuline zebuline mentioned this pull request Aug 30, 2016
3 tasks
@zebuline
Copy link
Contributor

zebuline commented Sep 1, 2016

closed in favor of #93

@zebuline zebuline closed this Sep 1, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants