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

sort list of reqd fields #124

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Apr 21, 2017

Conversation

@dradetsky
Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 17, 2017

apropos of #113, i was recently trying to make some changes to something-or-other, and then diffing the generated swagger output to confirm that i hadn't actually screwed anything up. I noticed that the order of the requirements lists in generated definitions changed arbitrarily between runs, making it impossible to do this check. This change just sorts the required list.

There are 5 failing tests, but they're failing on dev too, and all have to do with tornado, which I can't see this having anything to do with.

@dradetsky

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 20, 2017

@sloria @jmcarp although i see the tests are passing on travis, i had 5 tornado-related tests fail locally. possibly, the list of dev-requirements is missing something, but i don't know enough about tornado to guess what.

@dradetsky

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 20, 2017

fwiw, i'm seeing AttributeError: 'URLSpec' object has no attribute '_path' and i note that the tornado dev-requirement is not pinned to a particular version, but that's all i can say.

@dradetsky

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 20, 2017

actually, i can also say

(venv3) % pip show tornado
Name: tornado
Version: 4.5
@sloria

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 20, 2017

dev has fixes for compatibility with the latest Tornado release, which is why the build is passing.

@dradetsky

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 21, 2017

merges upstream

fuckin' a!

should i merge upstream into this pr? is it otherwise acceptable?

@sloria

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 21, 2017

No need to merge upstream. Looks good to merge. Thanks!

@sloria sloria merged commit 5b7e384 into marshmallow-code:dev Apr 21, 2017

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.