-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
Fix regression with Node update #212
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
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ @@ Coverage Diff @@
## stable #212 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 67.79% 68.03% +0.23%
==========================================
Files 82 82
Lines 7360 7370 +10
Branches 1438 1440 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 4990 5014 +24
+ Misses 1993 1984 -9
+ Partials 377 372 -5
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
0c1770d to
eda56dc
Compare
eda56dc to
b454b92
Compare
ajtmccarty
left a comment
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.
2 "you can do it if you want to" comments and one commented-out line that can maybe be removed
| # assert sorted([tag.peer_id for tag in tags]) == sorted([tag_green.id, tag_blue.id]) | ||
| car3 = await client.get(kind=TESTING_CAR, id=car_golf.id) | ||
| await car3.tags.fetch() | ||
| assert sorted([tag.id for tag in car3.tags.peers]) == sorted([tag_green.id, tag_blue.id]) |
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.
you can use sets for these instead of sorting
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.
Indeed, not sure how i missed that, I'll fix in another PR
0b9c723 to
2423449
Compare
2423449 to
64b5dff
Compare
This PR fixes an issue introduced by #199 that would prevent a node with relationship of cardinality one from being updated.
As a workaround, it's recommended to enable the property when querying the object (property=True)
This is good reminder that :
_strip_unmodified)I've also included the RN and the version upgrade to 1.4.1 in this PR