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

AssumedUUIDs.file in upgrade package resources looks suspicious #23

Open
badgerwithagun opened this issue Jul 2, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

Comments

@badgerwithagun
Copy link
Member

https://github.com/alfasoftware/morf/blob/master/morf-core/src/main/resources/org/alfasoftware/morf/upgrade/AssumedUUIDs.txt

@badgerwithagun badgerwithagun added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Jul 2, 2017
@badgerwithagun badgerwithagun changed the title upgrade package and AssumedUUIDs.txt file look orphaned and should be removed AssumedUUIDs.file in upgrade package resources looks suspicious Jul 2, 2017
@badgerwithagun
Copy link
Member Author

This looks like some leakage from elsewhere. Doesn't look like it belongs in morf.

@tsg21 tsg21 closed this as completed Jul 3, 2017
@tsg21 tsg21 reopened this Jul 3, 2017
@tsg21
Copy link
Member

tsg21 commented Oct 26, 2017

AssumedUUIDs.txt is a legacy of Alfa first introduced the UpgradeAudit table to track upgrade steps. It should at least be moved out of Morf, and possibly be removed entirely.

@pstefaniak7
Copy link
Contributor

UpgradePathFinder contains a logic for ignoring UUIDs loaded from this file. I imagine this has been added for backwards compatibility.

Do we need to support a scenario when some UUIDs are ignored in the upgrade process ? If the answer is yes then we could think about making this part of the public API.
Another option is to make wrap it up in the unsupported API to be removed in the future once obsolete UUID are no longer a problem.

@badgerwithagun
Copy link
Member Author

I guess there is some historical reason why this exists. I have my doubts as to whether anyone other than us would need it going forward, so whatever we implement here will probably never be a supported API. ideally we'd factor it out entirely. @tsg21 - thoughts?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants