-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 649
Add audit trail to the publish, yank and unyank transactions. #1700
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
Conversation
What recommendations would you have on what should be unit tested? |
migrations/2019-01-26-090348_create_version_owner_actions/up.sql
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
5da6778
to
d03686b
Compare
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #1677) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
bae2a11
to
5c8db82
Compare
5c8db82
to
0fbb832
Compare
79ce0b6
to
15856bc
Compare
migrations/2019-01-26-090348_create_version_owner_actions/up.sql
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
migrations/2019-01-26-090348_create_version_owner_actions/up.sql
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
I'd like to see some integration tests for this as well |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #1599) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
c4db368
to
6a0c3e6
Compare
Sorry that I left this alone for so long. I noticed that @carols10cents merged PR 1604 that this was based on so I've updated this PR and made the changes suggested. Some of the changes @sgrif made are related to code that's already been merged. I have not made these, and @carols10cents and @sgrif will have to decide which of these should be made. |
653a122
to
2213b9c
Compare
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.
@markcatley I'm sorry we left this PR for so long! Thank you so much for sticking with it. I think we should definitely add some NOT NULL
constraints as mentioned, and I would merge either way on renaming the fields in this PR or not.
464cb34
to
73c7238
Compare
Hi @carols10cents @sgrif, I think it's probably a good idea to rename those fields. Never an easier time than when the table is unused (I hope). I believe all the changes have now been made. Kind regards, |
34b9bf8
to
88d9ec0
Compare
88d9ec0
to
8d35e31
Compare
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.
This is getting really close! I just noticed a few small things on my latest read through-- please change the underscores in the parameter names and the comments in the tests where noted. Thank you!!
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #1911) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #1927) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
The first audit action test covers testing that a crate starts without any audit actions, and it's unlikely these assertions will ever fail.
I've resolved the merge conflicts and made the small outstanding fixes so that we can merge this in, which I'll do once CI passes :) Thanks! |
all comments have been addressed
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 4d7f8a8 has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-travis |
Contributes to Issue 1548
Based on the commits from PR 1604