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

Remove rate_limit_status, it no longer works and isn't useful #8

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@pwr22

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

Even if it did, with the 1.1 API limiting there is no meaningful way to display
it all

rate_limit_status gives a error 400 but it should still work, the endpoint
exists, Net::Twitter may have an issue

Remove rate_limit_status, it no longer works
Even if it did, with the 1.1 API limiting there is no meaningful way to display
it all

rate_limit_status gives a error 400 but it should still work, the endpoint
exists
@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

Errors look like this

07:55:21 [INFO] Received request https://api.twitter.com/1.1/application/rate_limit_status.json?
07:58:36 [INFO] Response from https://api.twitter.com/1.1/application/rate_limit_status.json? arrived (400)
07:58:36 [ERROR] twitter errer: 400 Bad Request at /home/peter/.perlbrew/libs/5.20.1@twirc/lib/perl5/x86_64-linux/Class/MOP/Method/Wrapped.pm line 158

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

Errors look like this

07:55:21 [INFO] Received request https://api.twitter.com/1.1/application/rate_limit_status.json?
07:58:36 [INFO] Response from https://api.twitter.com/1.1/application/rate_limit_status.json? arrived (400)
07:58:36 [ERROR] twitter errer: 400 Bad Request at /home/peter/.perlbrew/libs/5.20.1@twirc/lib/perl5/x86_64-linux/Class/MOP/Method/Wrapped.pm line 158
@semifor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@semifor

semifor Jan 29, 2015

Owner

I'm not sure what's up here. rate_limit_status works for me. The response is in API v1.1 is very different, but it's returning 200, not 400. I think I'd rather modify it to take arguments and change the output than remove it. I'll investigate.

FYI, I fixed the spelling error is that message: 78253e8.

Owner

semifor commented Jan 29, 2015

I'm not sure what's up here. rate_limit_status works for me. The response is in API v1.1 is very different, but it's returning 200, not 400. I think I'd rather modify it to take arguments and change the output than remove it. I'll investigate.

FYI, I fixed the spelling error is that message: 78253e8.

@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

Did you test via Twirc or directly with Net::Twitter

I have not tried the latter yet, but there are a few other commands failing for me. If testing in Twirc, does favourite work for you?

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

Did you test via Twirc or directly with Net::Twitter

I have not tried the latter yet, but there are a few other commands failing for me. If testing in Twirc, does favourite work for you?

@semifor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@semifor

semifor Jan 29, 2015

Owner

I tested Net::Twitter directly. Haven't set up twirc to test it, yet.

Owner

semifor commented Jan 29, 2015

I tested Net::Twitter directly. Haven't set up twirc to test it, yet.

@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

I'll try the direct approach a bit later, but will have to be with my own App keys, unless I extract those from Twirc

I initially found my keys didn't work properly when manually testing, and had to regenerate both App and cllient keys, then it worked fine. Maybe something similar could be going on here (i.e. a problem on twitter's end)?

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

I'll try the direct approach a bit later, but will have to be with my own App keys, unless I extract those from Twirc

I initially found my keys didn't work properly when manually testing, and had to regenerate both App and cllient keys, then it worked fine. Maybe something similar could be going on here (i.e. a problem on twitter's end)?

@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

And how would you like to condense / format all these limits?

https://dev.twitter.com/rest/public/rate-limits

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

And how would you like to condense / format all these limits?

https://dev.twitter.com/rest/public/rate-limits

@semifor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@semifor

semifor Jan 29, 2015

Owner

I'd have the rate_limit_status command take an optional argument, the API method (the Net::Twitter name for the method), and extract that limit from the results for display.

Without arguments, I'd filter the result and show the limits that have been exceeded, or are closest to being exceeded. Top 3 or 4. Whatever fits comfortably on a single line.

Owner

semifor commented Jan 29, 2015

I'd have the rate_limit_status command take an optional argument, the API method (the Net::Twitter name for the method), and extract that limit from the results for display.

Without arguments, I'd filter the result and show the limits that have been exceeded, or are closest to being exceeded. Top 3 or 4. Whatever fits comfortably on a single line.

@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

My view is that maintaining this feature would be a waste. For Net::Twitter, an API, it is obviously useful as a program can make intelligent decisions based on rate limit data. For Twirc, a twitter client, it is not useful as I can't envisage any scenario where a human would use it, and how they could meaningfully act on the results

What I mean is that if you want to post a tweet you're going to do that, and if it fails you will be told. No need to manually check first. Nothing to do when it fails but wait

When you used to use Twirc how often did you use the command? All the other twitter gateways I've looked at don't provide this command

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

My view is that maintaining this feature would be a waste. For Net::Twitter, an API, it is obviously useful as a program can make intelligent decisions based on rate limit data. For Twirc, a twitter client, it is not useful as I can't envisage any scenario where a human would use it, and how they could meaningfully act on the results

What I mean is that if you want to post a tweet you're going to do that, and if it fails you will be told. No need to manually check first. Nothing to do when it fails but wait

When you used to use Twirc how often did you use the command? All the other twitter gateways I've looked at don't provide this command

@pwr22 pwr22 changed the title from Remove rate_limit_status, it no longer works to Remove rate_limit_status, it no longer works and isn't useful Jan 29, 2015

@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

I've tested Net::Twitter with both my own and Twirc's keys and rate_limit_status works in both cases. I am uncertain why Twirc itself claims failure

I am uncertain how to test successfully using LWP::UserAgent::POE

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

I've tested Net::Twitter with both my own and Twirc's keys and rate_limit_status works in both cases. I am uncertain why Twirc itself claims failure

I am uncertain how to test successfully using LWP::UserAgent::POE

@pwr22

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwr22

pwr22 Jan 29, 2015

Hmm, actually it looks like it does work, it is just failing (looks like a timeout) after a few minutes. Same error (400) as twirc. This looks to be the source of the problem

pwr22 commented Jan 29, 2015

Hmm, actually it looks like it does work, it is just failing (looks like a timeout) after a few minutes. Same error (400) as twirc. This looks to be the source of the problem

@semifor

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@semifor

semifor Jan 30, 2015

Owner

As discussed on IRC, closing this with the intent to "fix" this feature rather than remove it.

Owner

semifor commented Jan 30, 2015

As discussed on IRC, closing this with the intent to "fix" this feature rather than remove it.

@semifor semifor closed this Jan 30, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment