add Pusher Channels mention where absent

[annzenkina]

No description provided.

[WillSewell]

Generally looks good, and I think the channel_client variable makes things clearer (we should do this elsewhere really).

Like with pusher-http-ruby, I suggest also updating the description in package.json.

In addition to that, I think the following should be updated:

• "In order to use this library, you need to have an account on http://pusher.com" -> "In order to use this library, you need to have an account on https://pusher.com/channels"
• "Asynchronous methods on the Pusher Channels class" -> "Asynchronous methods on the Pusher class"
• "To authorise your users to access private channels on Pusher" -> "To authorise your users to access private channels on Pusher Channels"
• "x-pusher-key - application key, sent by Pusher" -> "x-pusher-key - application key, sent by Channels"
• "x-pusher-signature - WebHook signature, generated by Pusher" -> "x-pusher-signature - WebHook signature, generated by Channels"
• "content-type - must be set to application/json, what Pusher does" -> "content-type - must be set to application/json, what Channels does"
• "Returns the Date object for the time when the WebHook was sent from Pusher" -> "Returns the Date object for the time when the WebHook was sent from Channels"

[annzenkina]

@WillSewell done. Not entirely sure, but I think we might need to update the docs here as well: https://www.npmjs.com/package/pusher. What do you think?

[WillSewell]

I think we might need to update the docs here as well: https://www.npmjs.com/package/pusher

I think these will be picked up automatically from the master of Github.

[WillSewell]

I'm not sure you actually need to make a release for these changes to be picked up on https://www.npmjs.com/.

[annzenkina]

hm. I'll try to merge the PR without changing the version and see how it goes.