Ok, makes sense. Then the pydoc should be updated to add a description of
the database_id param.

--
Matt Meshulam
Solutions Architect, TempoDB
https://tempo-db.com


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Aaron Brenzel <notifications@github.com>wrote:

> In tempodb/client.py:
>
> > +            'end': vend,
> > +            'predicate.function': predicate,
> > +            'predicate.period': period,
> > +            'tz': tz,
> > +            'limit': limit
> > +        }
> > +        url_args = endpoint.make_url_args(params)
> > +        url = '?'.join([url, url_args])
> > +        resp = self.session.get(url)
> > +        r = Response(resp, self.session)
> > +        data = json.loads(r.resp.text)
> > +        c = protocol.DataPointCursor(data['data'], protocol.DataPointFound, r,
> > +                                     tz=data['tz'])
> > +        return c
> > +
> > +    def aggregate_data(self, aggregation, keys=[], tags=[], attrs={},
>
> Generally speaking, we aren't worried about backwards compatibility with
> these clients. On the other hand, this change would probably impact
> adoption if we were to release the client before the database ID auth
> feature goes in. So that's more a question of release strategy, but as we
> get along with these client rewrites it looks more and more like we're
> going to be waiting for the official 1.0 rollout before getting them out
> there.
>
> --
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/tempodb/tempodb-python/pull/37/files#r9238703>
> .
>