Closed grundleborg closed 2 years ago
Merging #116 (809c16c) into main (370ccb9) will increase coverage by
0.02%
. The diff coverage is100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #116 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.41% 82.44% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 37 37
Lines 637 638 +1
Branches 28 34 +6
==========================================
+ Hits 525 526 +1
Misses 102 102
Partials 10 10
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
crispy_tailwind/templates/tailwind/field.html | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 370ccb9...809c16c. Read the comment docs.
Thanks for this. 👍
Yes, this changed in Django 4.0, see https://github.com/django/django/commit/b9e872b59329393f615c440c54f632a49ab05b78
Could you add a test for this? I'd like to have a test to ensure we continue to support Django 3.2.
Yes happy to add a test - I'll update this PR.
I'm finding, though, that the current test suite already has some failures with Django 4.x - I'll see if I can send a separate PR for that first.
Actually, on closer inspection it turns out there was already a test for this, which was failing on Django 4.0. I've changed the CI to include Django 4.0 and fixed the other tests that were broken and included it all in this PR.
@smithdc1 would you mind approving the updates to this PR for the CI to run when you have a moment? I think this should fix all the django 4.0 issues now (including the original one I reported with CheckboxSelectMultiple).
Ah sorry, I messed up in the CI config - this time it really should work!
Thanks for the updates. Could you also update the setup.py
file to update the classifiers for the newly supported versions?
Thanks again.
Ah yeah, I forgot about that - now added to the PR.
Thanks for pushing this along. I've pushed a few edits to bump versions of other items across the package. Let's see what the tests says.
@grundleborg thank you for all of your efforts. 🏅
You're welcome - it's a very useful library so thank you for creating it.
Because this is a subclass of
RadioSelect
, the check foris_radioselect
needs to come after the check foris_checkboxselectmultiple
otherwise the radio widget will always be shown instead.Fixes #115