Update index definition to be compatible with Django 5 #89
Conversation
|
@Barthelemy, thanks for the PR. Based on the document, it needs a migration to rename the index. Could you add it as well? |
|
Thanks for the comment. I did not realize that the migration should be part of the PR, sorry about that. |
|
I have added the migration that Django generated. I am not sure why there is the |
Barthelemy
force-pushed
the
Barthelemy-patch-1
branch
from
d5c917e to
2f13e83
Compare
It's probably related to this change. Could you set DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD before generating the migration so that the migration is clean for this PR |
|
Things are never as simple as we thought... Given that the django versions still supported are 4.2, 5.1 and 5.2 I would propose to keep only the support for 4.2.20, 5.1.9, 5.2.1. |
|
@Barthelemy, please go ahead and update the supported versions. Users can always use the previous tag version if needed. |
|
Hello, thanks for the work! Quick question: what is the current status for this PR? Do you plan to merge it soon @shellfly ? |
|
@Barthelemy, there were some errors in the CI, but the logs have expired. I just added the manual trigger for the CI workflow. Can you merge the update to your branch so that we can re-run the CI and fix the errors to move on. |
|
@shellfly I am sorry, I don't understand what I should do. I should merge what update into my branch ? |
|
@Barthelemy, I just triggered a CI run, and it surfaced some migration-related errors—possibly due to the deprecated index_together. When you have a moment, could you try running squashmigrations and run the tests locally to verify it? |
added the missing DEFAULT_AUTO_FIELD to the tests
|
@shellfly Perhaps it is better now |
|
@Barthelemy @jacquemard Thanks for your work! A new release has been created, and the updated version is now live on PyPI. |
|
Perfect that will really help me, thanks a lot both of you for your work ! |
3 participants
fix #88