-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
[CI] include pum check in CI to test datamodel upgrades #365
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
(seems it prevents migrations to work)
e1a397d
to
31ac335
Compare
(not too sure how pum check could work for such optional components... IMO we should make them non-optional)
#363 Should fix qwat_sigip related issues. If not I will be glad to contribute to fix it properly to ensure small customizations are supported. |
@olivierdalang review asked to oslandia if that's ok for you? |
@ponceta Yes sure :-) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, with previous comments and one for a gnu-ism
while [[ $# > 0 ]]; do | ||
key="$1" | ||
case $key in | ||
-h|--help) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
bash builtin long option names with the double-dash prefix. This is an extension from GNU getopt (on macos and bsd-like you have to install gnu-getopt).
More details: #228
and from Denis https://stackoverflow.com/a/37485578 :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I copied this from tests.sh
, thus I suggest to keep it like that for consistency
(to be honest, no idea what this is about :-D)
I think this can be merged provided we're aware of this risk: I'm not 100% sure this wont cause havoc for those who are not using the latest pum version, since there is a change to migrations files. For the change in For the changes in 1.4.0_*, since not release yet, I guess we can consider they are in no one's production database. If we revert that, we loose postgres 9.6 compatibility. |
Thank you @olivierdalang ! We will fix the remaining bug and stuff when they appear. |
Dependencies
TODO
Notes
I think the tests do work as expected, and highlighted the following issues (which are fixed in this PR):
os.system
that does not raise exceptions on failure)