{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/OpenCollar/opencollar/issues/750","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/OpenCollar/opencollar/issues/750/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/OpenCollar/opencollar/issues/750/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/OpenCollar/opencollar/issues/750/events","html_url":"https://github.com/OpenCollar/opencollar/issues/750","id":116598300,"number":750,"title":"a simple method to test the link-set's build integrity","user":{"login":"WendyStarfall","id":1100007,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1100007?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall","html_url":"https://github.com/WendyStarfall","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/WendyStarfall/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/OpenCollar/opencollar/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"84b6eb"},{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/OpenCollar/opencollar/labels/proposal","name":"proposal","color":"7f4c9b"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2015-11-12T17:25:54Z","updated_at":"2015-11-12T17:25:54Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Versions: 4.0.0 to 4.0.11\r\n\r\nI've been closely observing others efforts to build the new 4.0 API and I'm happy to have learned that some users figured it out just by digging some through the PRs since mid July or fully on their own.\r\n\r\nHowever, we should add a few basic helpers to prevent mistakes. Zi Ree suggested that link specific scripts could test if they were indeed in the right link. I think this is a good idea and should be considered.\r\n\r\nThe most obvious build mistake would be falsely linked ``com [root]`` and ``auth [2]`` then nothing will work at all. It's also not hard to test ``dialog [3]`` because if not getting any menus something obviously went wrong. Things get icky though with ``RLV [4]`` and especially with ``settings [5]`` as the latter may not be noticed until a user already further downstream realizes RLV is gone or that nothing is ever stored.\r\n\r\nI propose we add a simple test if the script is in the correct link and play a sound and OwnerSay if not. :speak_no_evil:\r\n"}}