sha174n commented on PR #44080: URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/44080#issuecomment-5793939478
@rusackas one commit on top in e9d4ad8, no behaviour change: comments trimmed where `update_from_object`'s and `_repoints_table`'s docstrings already carry the point, and the conversion parameter now states just what that clause covers, a conversion that changes the label in the same save. The sentence I dropped reasoned about a later save instead, which the clause cannot speak to: `raise_for_access` resolves the requested table through `query_datasources_by_name`, i.e. against the stored name rather than the one the request is about to write. `UpdateDatasetCommand._validate_table_access` resolves the same way, so nothing here diverges from it. Both points you raised are unchanged and still in: the omitted-key read in d16ddd8, the non-dataset guard in 5ce70d6. On the red CI, all four failures are one cause and it is not from this branch: `babel-extract` and `check_pot_drift` (plus the two gates aggregating it) fail on `messages.pot` drift for a string in `superset/commands/database/exceptions.py`. The template on this branch is byte-identical to master's and master's source carries the newer wording, so it reproduces on master and wants a regeneration PR rather than catalog churn here. 24 tests green, pre-commit clean. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
