I filed a bug as a reminder. https://bugs.launchpad.net/quantum/+bug/1129260
Now it is assigned to me. Feel free to take it if you want.
"quantum-db-manage upgrade grizzly" sounds nice!
Akihiro
(2013/02/18 23:52), Mark McClain wrote:
I'm ok with it. My plan was to clean up the migration branches tomorrow afternoon. I was also
going to create a no-op migration called grizzly so that deployers could init their folsom db with
"stamp folsom" and then run "upgrade grizzly"
mark
On Feb 18, 2013, at 8:15 AM, Salvatore Orlando <[email protected]> wrote:
I'm fine with this, even if fixing the migration script is something
which will the require the reviewers just to rubberstamp the patches.
We can start filing a bug with critical or high priority and ensure it
targets G-3.
Salvatore
On 18 February 2013 14:01, Akihiro MOTOKI <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
Several patches contains db migration scripts and now we are merging several
patches.
It leads to branches in db migration scripts. In a usual process, we need to
rebase
the patch to catch up the latest, but it forces us to do another review and
approval.
How about having a special rule that we ignore branches in db migration scripts
until G-3 branch cut and fix the branches of db migration scirpts
just before/after the branch cut?
Thanks
Akihiro
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~quantum-core
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
