Skip to content

Conversation

@thewheat
Copy link
Contributor

@thewheat thewheat commented Jun 8, 2018

  • Allow direct contact/lead deletion by ID / user_id value
  • Make existing .delete(contact) smarter
    • if no id but has user_id do deletion by user_id
    • throw an exception if no identifiers
  • Adding the new setID and setUserID functions coincidentally allows better updating of contacts as well
    • previously you had to find a contact, make changes to that object and update that contact
    • now you can create a contact object and update directly simplifying and reducing API calls

@thewheat thewheat force-pushed the timlim/support-delete-by-id-and-user-id branch from 873bbaf to bbd299c Compare August 13, 2018 08:26
@choran choran added the java label Sep 13, 2018
@choran choran self-assigned this Sep 14, 2018
Copy link
Member

@choran choran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

@choran
Copy link
Member

choran commented Sep 14, 2018

@thewheat I think this looks great. I guess it is an unrelated question but I was checking for hard delete. I know that is not available via the leads endpoint but was just looking in the Java SDK and noticed that it is here but not shown in the readme. I need to add some info on that so people are aware of it. I just wanted to check if you were aware of any reason we did not add the info in the readme?
I will merge this. I will likely do a release next week

@choran choran merged commit aefbaf4 into master Sep 14, 2018
@thewheat
Copy link
Contributor Author

@choran back for holidays here. Not sure I get what you mean there about not adding the info in the readme. Are you referring to user hard deletes? I think that was just missed out on so definitely worth adding 👍

Added to this issue #227 so we wont' forget

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

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants