Lonami
> Concretely, so far: > > * authentication > > * updates and gap handling loop Fair enough. Those do seem hard to decouple even further. > client implements the...
Appreciate the detailed report, unfortunately don't think I'll look into this any time soon. I would be surprised if Telethon is getting "locked up" though, as I'd expect to have...
This is stretching "no new features" in v1 a bit too much. Perhaps the code can instead be refactored, so that it's easier for users to add what they need...
> But since it's a feature that exists in the official Bots API Telethon's formatting is not 100% compatible with Bot API's and that was on purpose. Aligning with them...
Why is the existing `offset_id` and breaking out of the loop early not enough?
I've discussed this before and also argued it wasn't needed. But I may reconsider if more people need it. One of my worries is that some offsets seem to not...
> offset_id is not enought if you need to evaluate if you have gap in the messages Can you help me understand why? A practical example perhaps.
Right, so the usecase is "going back" to a "failed gap", and `offset_id` + `limit` is not desirable because that might needlessly include messages outside of the expected range. In...
I can't look into this any time soon. Perhaps upgrading our dependencies would help. If you're willing to try I'm happy to review PRs.
Superseded by #49.