-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Feature/publication models #9
Conversation
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.
Seems like mostly stuff being moved around, like you mentioned, so that should be good. Just wanted to confirm that it is indeed fine to retroactively alter the migration files.
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
# Generated by Django 4.1.7 on 2023-06-20 13:39 | |||
# Generated by Django 4.1.13 on 2023-12-15 11:46 |
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.
Just to double check, because I think we discussed this for another PR already: it is safe in this case to retroactively alter migrations, because this application/database is not in production, right?
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.
yes! still in development so now we can still make the migrations cleaner :-) So removed the db-views and switched to django-models.
remove fixtures from import
renamed sd type 27 gebied
-changes views and functions into separate app publicatie_tabellen
-removed db table names so django will add app name to table