Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.74%. Comparing base (e4106e0) to head (ae187c7).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2929   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.74%   96.74%           
=======================================
  Files         147      147           
  Lines       14978    14984    +6     
=======================================
+ Hits        14491    14497    +6     
  Misses        487      487           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

You are right, calling this method this way does not make much sense. But the code path that ends up in this situation is complex. Other code paths might suffer from the same issue, and it is not trivial to identify those.

It is expected that the values of the parameters are identical, so this is the right thing to do in that situation. I could throw an exception when parameter values contradict. But then this becomes a breaking change for some people where this just behaved incorrectly.

Hello. Is there a chance we can have it merged?

@JLLeitschuh you are right, now add_parameters_to_url gives precedence to the given parameters and overwrites params that exist in the url. The code path that produced the conflict now removes all params from parameters that are contained in the url, giving precedence in that particular situation only (which is the right thing to do there).