Skip to content
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

_config_version not being set after on_settings_migrate() #1771

Closed
kantlivelong opened this issue Feb 13, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@kantlivelong
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Feb 13, 2017

What were you doing?

Using on_settings_migrate()

What did you expect to happen?

_config_version should be set/updated

What happened instead?

_config_version not set/updated.

Branch & Commit or Version of OctoPrint

1.3.1 (master)

Printer model & used firmware incl. version

N/A

Browser and Version of Browser, Operating System running Browser

N/A

Link to octoprint.log

https://paste.debian.net/914167/

Link to contents of terminal tab or serial.log

N/A

Link to contents of Javascript console in the browser

N/A

Screenshot(s) showing the problem:

N/A

I have read the FAQ.

More Details:

Not entirely sure if it just my plugin or an issue with OctoPrint as I can't find any plugins that utilize this other than SoftwareUpdate.

I've tried explicitly setting the value within on_settings_migrate() and nothing gets written.

Source

@GitIssueBot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Feb 13, 2017

Hi @kantlivelong,

It looks like there is some information missing from your bug report that will be needed in order to solve the problem. Read the Contribution Guidelines which will provide you with a template to fill out here so that your bug report is ready to be investigated (I promise I'll go away then too!).

If you did not intend to report a bug but wanted to request a feature or brain storm about some kind of development, please take special note of the title format to use as described in the Contribution Guidelines.

Please do not abuse the bug tracker as a support forum - if you have a question or otherwise need some kind of help or support refer to the Mailinglist or the G+ Community instead of here.

Also make sure you are at the right place - this is the bug tracker of the official version of OctoPrint, not the Raspberry Pi image OctoPi nor any unbundled third party OctoPrint plugins or unofficial versions. Make sure too that you have read through the Frequently Asked Questions and searched the existing tickets for your problem - try multiple search terms please.

I'm marking this one now as needing some more information. Please understand that if you do not provide that information within the next two weeks (until 2017-02-27 15:10 UTC) I'll close this ticket so it doesn't clutter the bug tracker. This is nothing personal, so please just be considerate and help the maintainers solve this problem quickly by following the guidelines linked above. Remember, the less time the devs have to spend running after information on tickets, the more time they have to actually solve problems and add awesome new features. Thank you!

Best regards,
~ Your friendly GitIssueBot

PS: I'm just an automated script, not a human being, so don't expect any replies from me :) Your ticket is read by humans too, I'm just not one of them.

@foosel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

commented Feb 13, 2017

Could you try the maintenance branch? I think I fell over that myself and fixed it there: a646fff

@kantlivelong

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Feb 13, 2017

Yep looks good in maintenance branch. Are there any plans to backport the fix to 1.2.x for users who have not upgraded?

@foosel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

commented Feb 13, 2017

There's no way to do that since the only way to get fixes to people that doesn't involve very hackish things (and that wouldn't even work here) is to have them update. And to be quite honest, even if it was possible I'd not open that can of worms, it would only add yet another branch to maintain which would pull even more resources away from actual development. It just doesn't scale :(

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.