You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We're technically updating the package record but what we're really doing is aggregating up build data. So it's not the package per se that's changing.
A cleaner solution would perhaps be to move this aggregate field platform_compatibility to a separate table since we're using packages as a convenient place to stick it.
Maybe packages_aggregates. It could hold platform_compatibility and score_details. I'll add an issue to track.
As an alternative we could add last_analyzed_at and last_ingested_at fields to make these dates explicit. One of the things I'd like to add to the portal (once it exists) is to surface these two dates to package authors and it feels better to have them be explicit rather than relying on updated_at.
We're technically updating the package record but what we're really doing is aggregating up build data. So it's not the package per se that's changing.
A cleaner solution would perhaps be to move this aggregate field
platform_compatibility
to a separate table since we're usingpackages
as a convenient place to stick it.Maybe
packages_aggregates
. It could holdplatform_compatibility
andscore_details
. I'll add an issue to track.Originally posted by @finestructure in #3298 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: