Closed softinio closed 7 years ago
Hi @softinio, thanks for the contribution!
It is better to copy the migration file over than to create a symbolic link as migrations may be generated in one place but used and deployed elsewhere.
In the meantime, symbolic links have the advantage that if you decide to change the migration file during development, you can do that on the linked file and your editor should usually be able to make changes to the actual file (that's at least true for Emacs).
Probably a better idea is to have two options for users to choose from? What do you think?
@lastland giving user choice is a good idea. Will work on that.
@lastland Change to make symbolic link or copying migration an option for the user. Over to you to review. Thanks.
wait I made a mistake
@lastland can you take a look ? Thanks.
@softinio Thank you! I'm working on something else right now. I will take a look at it tonight!
@lastland ok no problem. Is there anything to setup to run tests?
I think you would need setup databases in addition to the usual Scala and sbt environment. If you want to run the tests, just run sbt test
and see which tests fail. And if the failed tests are related to a particular database, you probably haven't set it up correctly.
I don't remember why the CI for PR is not working...
Oh, I forgot to mention that you need to publishLocal
before running the tests because the tests actually run sbt on an example project which depends on the library, and it will only find the latest library if you do publishLocal
. The complete command can be found in the CI configuration: https://github.com/lastland/scala-forklift/blob/develop/circle.yml
This looks good to me. Thanks again for the contribution!
@lastland your welcome. Glad I helped. Quick question when are you likely to publish this to maven as a new version to 0.3.0 ?
@softinio Oh thanks for reminding me of that! I should do that very soon.
@softinio I have released v0.3.1, but it may take a few hours to be present at Maven Central.
@lastland Hey, do you intend to release a version of v0.3.1 (with this fix) which is compatible with Scala 2.11? The "how to" seems to say that if you're on Scala 2.11 and Slick 3.2, you should use Forklift 0.2.2. Thanks!
@smedberg Hi, I didn't release v0.3.1 with Scala 2.11 because I haven't done a thorough testing on Scala 2.11. Now that you have asked, I will see if I can get something done tonight. :)
@lastland Thank you so much!
I should also document this change in README! I leave a comment here to remind myself.
@smedberg Published. Again, it would take some time to be present on MVN central.
Thanks!
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Li Yao notifications@github.com wrote:
@smedberg https://github.com/smedberg Published. Again, it would take some time to be present on MVN central.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/lastland/scala-forklift/pull/35#issuecomment-324205455, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGKg88IkE6NLu8KyxybF6CCAhgaEoKRiks5sa5G8gaJpZM4OrYck .
This PR should fix #31 and #28
It is better to copy the migration file over than to create a symbolic link as migrations may be generated in one place but used and deployed elsewhere.
The link path when I generated the migration on my laptop got saved to source control with my laptop home directory in its path. This is wrong of course.