Skip to content
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

Make conflict detection between branch and database less strict. #487

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 25, 2024

Conversation

vpetrovykh
Copy link
Member

It is an error to specify database and branch at the same time on the same configuration level.
It is OK to override previous configuration with either database or branch.
It is OK for the credentials file to contain both database and branch fields in order to facilitate transitioning from old style to the new style while maintaining backwards compatibility. The values must agree, though.

@vpetrovykh vpetrovykh requested a review from a team April 5, 2024 17:35
It is an error to specify `database` and `branch` at the same
time on the same configuration level.
It is OK to override previous configuration with either `database` or
`branch`.
It is OK for the credentials file to contain both `database` and
`branch` fields in order to facilitate transitioning from old style to
the new style while maintaining backwards compatibility. The values must
agree, though.
If the `EDGEDB_CLOUD_PROFILE` is set, it should be visible at any point
in the configuration resolution process.
@aljazerzen
Copy link

I've implemented the same behavior in edgedb-rust.

When writing credentials.json, I've even implemented writing both branch and database, so it is backward compatible. This is useful if credentials.json is written by CLI on the new version and then old version of bindings reads it.

@vpetrovykh vpetrovykh merged commit c30f062 into master Apr 25, 2024
42 checks passed
@vpetrovykh vpetrovykh deleted the fix branch April 25, 2024 17:38
fantix added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2024
New Features
============

* Support EdgeDB 5.0 "branch" connection option
  (by @vpetrovykh in #484 #485 #487)

* Support EdgeDB 5.0 AI extension
  (by @fantix in #489 #490)

Breaking Changes
================

* Enum values can now compare to user-defined enums successfully (#425)
  (by @fantix in bb7522c for #419)

* Add optional default to codegen params (#426)
  (by @fantix in 21b024a for #422)

Changes
=======

* blocking client: fix connect and timeout, support IPv6 (#499)
  (by @fantix @zachary822 in 28a83fd for #486)

Fixes
=====

* Add test to check setting a computed global using with_globals. (#494)
  (by @dnwpark in 636bc0e for #494)

* Fix test and add Python 3.12 in CI
  (by @fantix in #498 #503)

* Use result of pydantic_dataclass, will silence linters (#501)
  (by @AdrienPensart in d88187a)

* Extract ExecuteContext as in/out argument (#500)
  (by @fantix in 2fb7965 for #493)
@fantix fantix mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2024
fantix added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2024
New Features
============

* Support EdgeDB 5.0 "branch" connection option
  (by @vpetrovykh in #484 #485 #487)

* Support EdgeDB 5.0 AI extension
  (by @fantix in #489 #490)

Breaking Changes
================

* Enum values can now compare to user-defined enums successfully (#425)
  (by @fantix in bb7522c for #419)

* Add optional default to codegen params (#426)
  (by @fantix in 21b024a for #422)

Changes
=======

* blocking client: fix connect and timeout, support IPv6 (#499)
  (by @fantix @zachary822 in 28a83fd for #486)

Fixes
=====

* Add test to check setting a computed global using with_globals. (#494)
  (by @dnwpark in 636bc0e for #494)

* Fix test and add Python 3.12 in CI
  (by @fantix in #498 #503)

* Use result of pydantic_dataclass, will silence linters (#501)
  (by @AdrienPensart in d88187a)

* Extract ExecuteContext as in/out argument (#500)
  (by @fantix in 2fb7965 for #493)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants