#27142: makemigrations fails on special database connections
---------------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: gerricom | Owner: nobody
Type: Bug | Status: new
Component: Migrations | Version: 1.10
Severity: Release blocker | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
---------------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by timgraham):
On [https://github.com/django/django/pull/5977#discussion_r52391536 an old
pull request], Shai said:
The reason `makemigrations` should fail is that the more likely reason
for inconsistent history is a change in the migrations code (in
particular, dependencies), rather than direct manipulation of the
database. If the code of existing migrations is suspicious, we should
avoid building more migrations on it.
I think it's possible to use multiple databases without using database
routers. For example, `migrate` requires a database alias, so if you have
a read-only database, it's usable without a router as long as you don't
try to migrate it. (I didn't test it so I could be incorrect but perhaps
someone can confirm that.)
I think consulting database routers could still be a backwards-
incompatible change for some users since it would now require routers to
be setup for read-only databases.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27142#comment:7>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/066.54b94e0289f1abab9b53befaa1bebae2%40djangoproject.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
