Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Add multiple mirror sync with extensive include/exclude pattern matching #639
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add multiple mirror sync with extensive include/exclude pattern matching #639
Changes from all commits
cb4f948
267b94a
557cec0
df8a217
5815902
de27969
dbd3f75
1d4af06
0f07838
a5e3847
8217368
c3c5467
b2af339
76e7c29
1f6be80
8b4b965
223e29a
3ca604c
854d471
cf5cc7a
f6480b7
e0f3bf1
ce554b6
299d89b
1afd522
0c83779
a3b39db
fc5c4bf
ff90938
5f951d0
4108791
2ed0e86
183f482
b51ef67
5ded7dd
c0acdbc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
my intuition here would be that the version bump should not be part of this PR, but determined once the release is made. @janjagusch opinions?
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.
Yes, I just used it for deployment reasons on the dev environment so we can revert this before merging
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.
same q as above
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.
This would require a DB migration for existing databases, right?
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.
Nope, looks a bit complicated but it used the setter even when called over the constructor so this part
is actually run which just populates the mirror_channel_url again.
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.
Could you explain what this change does?
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.
When you use an attribute of another table without specifying a join on that table, sqlalchemy will create a cross join.
I can't remember the exact details, but this caused the wrong packages to be removed.
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.
IIUC, this code serves to work around the fact that you want to have a list in python but the DB schema currently has a string. Wouldn't it be better to change the data type in the DB?
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 didn't want to change the database type since it would also complicate the schema for such a small change.
Obviously we don't have any concrete numbers but I guess most users would only want to mirror one other channel instead of multiple ones.
Are you in favor of having a mapping to a list of mirror channel urls?
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.
Would you mind expanding the comments here to document what the code does and why? All of this only works / makes snese if the mirrored channel is on another quetz instance, right?
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.
That's my understanding as well.