-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
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
#4278 Added a CACHEDIR.TAG file to the cache directory #4504
#4278 Added a CACHEDIR.TAG file to the cache directory #4504
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## features #4504 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 95.75% 95.76% +<.01%
============================================
Files 111 111
Lines 24867 24879 +12
Branches 2455 2456 +1
============================================
+ Hits 23812 23825 +13
+ Misses 746 745 -1
Partials 309 309
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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.
well done thanks 👍
@feuillemorte glad to have you back btw 😁 Just curious what is the reason for this change? |
@nicoddemus that file is a marker for backup programs to skip the cache folders |
Ahh right, thanks! |
Waiting for @blueyed's approval. 👍 |
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.
Great, thanks - adjusted the changelog a bit (mainly because it was missing punctuation).
I think we would not need an extra test for this, but at least it is not a slow one (using pytester).
cache = Cache.for_config(config) | ||
cache.set("foo", "bar") | ||
cachedir_tag_path = cache._cachedir.joinpath("CACHEDIR.TAG") | ||
assert cachedir_tag_path.read_bytes() == CACHEDIR_TAG_CONTENT |
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 think this could be just asserted in some existing test (to not increase number of tests unnecessarily).
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.
Perhaps mark the PR as "Changes requested" @blueyed? This makes clear that there are still issues to address here, both to @feuillemorte and by us (I almost merged this until I saw this comment).
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.
Well, it was just a comment/suggestion - feel free to merge it already.
Fixes #4278