-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 148
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
Do not raise on missing contentChanges in didSave #187
Conversation
@bollwyvl would it make sense to move |
bump? just waiting for changelog and not sure which way to go ;) |
Well, it's starting to get used in other places. The biggest things I could see changing before having something that we sort of commit to are:
But it's all beta anwyay! Does this quiet down the log messages as well? I'm not too worried about it either way, just wondering. |
assert result is None | ||
|
||
# should raise on missing changes in didChange | ||
with pytest.raises(ShadowFilesystemError, match=".* is missing contentChanges"): |
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.
👍
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.
It's still all dark magic to me, but the test does test the condition.
Thanks for the review!
Have not been able to reproduce on master; I have a suspicion that the report of excessive logging was due to my mistake and pushing to PyPI with one diagnostic print in the code (oops)... Should get fixed now either way.
I guess that we can use semantic versioning to announce that (i.e. 1.0). |
References
Fixes #185.
Code changes
Reading through the specs, now I would have implemented
shadow_virtual_documents
differently, but I guess it is too early for a larger refactor. Let it be a simple bugfix for now...User-facing changes
None
Backwards-incompatible changes
None
Chores