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

Add notes to read_before_update regarding Python 3 #1910

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 13, 2019

Conversation

@cornelinux
Copy link
Member

cornelinux commented Oct 28, 2019

No description provided.

@cornelinux cornelinux requested a review from plettich Oct 28, 2019
@codecov

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 28, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #1910 into master will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1910      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.13%   97.14%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files         151      151              
  Lines       18481    18549      +68     
==========================================
+ Hits        17952    18019      +67     
- Misses        529      530       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
privacyidea/lib/user.py 99.34% <0%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
privacyidea/api/auth.py 97.2% <0%> (+0.28%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 07505a8...eb50837. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

plettich left a comment

Looks good but the PI_CUSTOMIZATION thing is not nice. Could we check this as well during the update?

@cornelinux

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

cornelinux commented Oct 30, 2019

Looks good but the PI_CUSTOMIZATION thing is not nice. Could we check this as well during the update?

You are right about the nice-level. But currently I feel it is a bit hard to determine. Users could either have chosen the simple way and put the changes in the original file system. I am not sure, if this can be identified by a relative path - obviously not.

The relative path could also point to a rewrite rule (if set up more professional) which might point to a central customization folder maybe under /etc/privacyidea. Parsing and determining all this sounds a bit challenging. What do you think?

@cornelinux cornelinux requested a review from plettich Nov 13, 2019
@plettich plettich merged commit 0404d63 into master Nov 13, 2019
5 checks passed
5 checks passed
ci/circleci Your tests passed on CircleCI!
Details
codecov/patch Coverage not affected when comparing 07505a8...eb50837
Details
codecov/project 97.14% (+<.01%) compared to 07505a8
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details
@plettich plettich deleted the rba_python3 branch Nov 13, 2019
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.